®

STRUCTURE
Special Section: Seismic Products
A Joint Publication of NCSEA | CASE | SEI

June 2011 Tall Buildings/High Rise

 Version 2.0
Now Includes
Adhesive Anchoring

The newly updated Powers Design Assist

(PDA V2.0) anchor design interface puts technical
data into a dynamic real-time environment to
better help you visualize, consider and specify
anchors in today’s changing engineering climate.
PDA’s simple but unique dashboard allows for
anchor design in just minutes using 5 easy steps.
The user has the ability to create and modify
a 3D model of the project combined with
real-time calculation results in accordance
with ACI 318 Appendix D. The software offers
several choices of post-installed mechanical
and adhesive anchors as well as cast-in-place POWERFUL NEW
INTERFACE FOR
anchor solutions. Supporting approvals, listings, REAL-TIME SOLUTIONS
datasheets, etc. are easily accessed in the
software library and can be attached to
detailed project results.

POWERS OFFERS
THE MOST CODE
LISTED PRODUCTS

PDA Improved and modernized dashboard features include:

• Design of adhesive anchors in addition to mechanical anchors and
cast-in-place anchors (CIP)
• 3 new adhesive anchor systems and 3 new mechanical anchors now
included, with additional systems to come
• User can design using 3 versions of ACI 318 Appendix D:
2008, 2005 or 2002 versions
• New library function allows user to access all
UPDATED needed documents without leaving PDA
FREE PDA
SOFTWARE!
REGISTER TODAY AT:
www.powersdesignassist.com Powers
AND RECEIVE A FREE GYM BAG New 2011
A/E Manual
Coming Soon!
Powers Fasteners, Inc. www.powers.com
2 Powers Lane P: (914) 235-6300
Brewster, NY 10509 F: (914) 576-6483
 FEATURES CONTENTS June 2011

26 3344 Peachtree/Sovereign
By Clinton O. Rex, Ph.D., P.E. and Rachel Lancaster, E.I.T.
Atlanta’s most unique mixed-use development is highlighted by
its unique exterior surface leans and curves, creating a building
COLUMNS
in which every floor is a different shape and size. Soaring 5 Editorial
644 feet, it is the tallest building in the Buckhead Skyline and Education in Wood Structural
the tallest constructed in Atlanta in almost 20 years. Design: Who Needs It?
By Steven M. Cramer, Ph.D., P.E.
and Dan L. Wheat, Ph.D., P.E.
29 Engineering an Icon 7 InFocus
By Patrick McCafferty, P.E., Daniel Brodkin, P.E., STEM
David Farnsworth, P.E. and David Scott, P.E. By Greg Schindler, S.E.
The Marina Bay Sands® Integrated Resort is part of a bold
8 Structural Practices
new development initiative within Singapore’s Marina Bay
Becoming a Results-Oriented
district. This $5.7 billion resort encompasses 10 million
Structural Engineer – Part 2
square feet of mixed-use development and features three By John P. Miller, P.E., S.E.
55-story luxury hotel towers This article introduces the structural
12 Construction Issues
design of the 55-story Marina Bay SandsHotel and SkyPark.
Accommodating Movement
in High-Rise Wood Frame
35 Seismic Products Building Construction
Special By Larry Kahaner By Richard W. Howe, P.E.
With the recent earthquake and resulting tsunami in Japan, 16 Structural Performance
Section
building owners and engineers are taking a fresh focus on Use of Wood Structural Panels
seismic ground mitigation, retrofitting and repair. This month to Resist Combined Shear and
we talk to vendors of seismic products about the state of the Uplift from Wind
industry and what the near future holds in store. By Paul Coats, P.E. and
Brad Douglas, P.E.
20 Guest Column
IN EVERY ISSUE Drivers of Innovation
By Jan Klerks, CTBUH
6 Advertiser Index
48 Resource Guide
(Tall Buildings/High Rise) DEPARTMENTS
52 NCSEA News
54 SEI Structural Columns 44 InSights
56 CASE in Point Weathering Steel for Bridges
By Brian Kozy, Ph.D., P.E. and
Lou Triandafilou, P.E.
46 Education Issues
®

STRUCTURE

Resolution of Deficiencies in
Engineering Education
Special Section: Seismic Products ON THE COVER By Kevin Dong, P.E., S.E.
The Marina Bay Sands Integrated Resort is located within 51 Spotlight
Singapore’s Marina Bay district. This $5.7 billion resort features The World’s Tallest Building
A Joint Publication of NCSEA | CASE | SEI

three 55-story luxury hotel towers housing 2,560 rooms and By William F. Baker, P.E., S.E.,
topped by the 2.5 acre landscaped rooftop SkyPark. It is the focus and James J. Pawlikowski, S.E.
of one of this month’s feature articles on page 29.
June 2011 Tall Buildings/High Rise
58 Structural Forum
Grandfathering
By Barry Arnold, S.E., SECB
Publication of any article, image, or advertisement in STRUCTURE® magazine does not constitute endorsement
by NCSEA, CASE, SEI, C 3 Ink, or the Editorial Board. Authors, contributors, and advertisers retain sole
responsibility for the content of their submissions.

STRUCTURE magazine 4 June 2011

Editorial Education in Wood Structural Design:
new trends, new techniques and current industry issues
Who Needs It?
By Steven M. Cramer, Ph.D., P.E. and Dan L. Wheat, Ph.D., P.E.

I
n early 2008, with Robert Taylor, then of the American Wood
Council, we presented a paper at the 2008 Structures Congress Who teaches? Tenure track faculty Other
predicting the outlook on structural wood design education in
universities and colleges. We predicted that faculty with exper- Do you plan to regularly offer in the
tise in wood structural design would become increasingly scarce, future?
Yes No

university budgets would continue to decline and the elimination

or reduction of wood structural design course offerings would be Offering 2009-10 academic year? Yes No
collateral damage. The lack of faculty expertise would be driven by
a supply line problem caused by a decline in the production of PhD
structural engineers specializing in wood design. Regular offering 2000 to 2010? Yes No

Little did we know what would happen later that fall, as hous-
ing demand collapsed and the economy dived. Wood construction
dramatically decreased, with suppliers and designers reducing and
fighting for survival. As we approach the three-year mark of these
events, wood construction recovery has been elusive, despite fleeting
glimmers of hope. A vast experience base has left the industry. One
can only assume that ultimately this exodus will be felt via a lack of
design experience and with the lack of a knowledge base – in practice
and in academia – by which to teach others. In addition, the fiscal
challenges in the majority of states are translating into deep cuts at
universities and colleges. It is not likely that engineering curricula,
including structural engineering and wood structural design, will
come out of this process unscathed despite increasing enrollments. In
short, one may conclude that the events of late 2008 will accelerate
the changes we predicted.
In an attempt to check our predictions, we recently developed a
survey and sent it to the department chairs of 238 civil engineering
undergraduate programs. The objectives of the survey were to gather a
snapshot of the offering of wood structural design to civil engineering
students over the past two decades and to assess the outlook going
forward. The survey consisted of 7 questions that could be answered
in under 10 minutes. With our appreciation, 49 percent of the chairs
responded. Figure 1 illustrates the main outcomes of the survey.
Slightly more than 50% of institutions regularly offered a wood
design course in the decade beginning in 1990, and the percentage
increased in the following decade. However, not all of these courses
devoted a full 3 credit hours to wood structural design and roughly
25 percent mixed wood with other topics such as masonry design.
In academic year 2009-2010, 50 percent of the respondents offered
a course in wood structural design, indicating that the definition
of “regular” does not mean an offering at least once per year as is
typically done for steel and reinforced concrete structural design.
Surprisingly, 58 percent of the respondents indicated that they plan
to continue to “regularly” offer a wood structural design course in
the future. Whether this is a stretch of the term “regular” remains to
be seen. Of those who have eliminated or reduced the frequency of
wood structural design offering, primary reasons (in decreasing order
of the number of similar comments) included:
• Lack of faculty or expertise in the area
• Faculty demands in other sub discipline areas
Regular offering 1990 to 2000? Yes No
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Figure 1: Responses from 117 civil engineering department chairs on teaching
wood structural design.
• Budget reductions
• Belief that the design is too similar to steel and concrete to
justify a separate course
For those who offered a wood structural design course at one time
or another:
• 71 percent relied upon tenure track faculty to teach the course,
• 24 percent relied upon adjuncts and lecturers,
• 3 percent used some combination of both and
• 2 percent relied on retired faculty.
In 2008, we knew that our predicted changes would take time to play
out. Our survey reveals they have not fully occurred to date, but the
events since spring 2008 and detail in survey responses indicate they are
beginning. Wood continues to provide an environmentally-sensitive,
economical, and aesthetically-pleasing building material that owners
will continue to demand in increasing volume as existing inventory is
absorbed. Wood structural design requires a detailed understanding
of the material and corresponding structural behavior that extends
beyond a cursory knowledge of the basic design provisions. Teaching
this subject promises to be important in the future, but in response
to the events in play, will likely be delivered in new ways. Out of trial
comes opportunity and innovation.▪
Steven M Cramer, Ph.D., P.E. (cramer@engr.wisc.edu) is the
Associate Dean of Academic Affairs and Professor of Civil and
Environmental Engineering at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
He currently chairs the SEI Committee on Wood Education.
Dan L. Wheat, Ph.D., P.E. is on the faculty in the Department
of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering at the
University of Texas at Austin.

STRUCTURE magazine 5 June 2011

 Advertiser index
ASC Profiles, Inc ................................... 32
Barsplice Products, Inc .......................... 42
Bentley Systems, Inc. ............................. 28
Computers & Structures, Inc. ............... 60
CoreBrace ............................................. 38
CTS Cement Manufacturing Corp........ 19
Dynamic Isolation Systems.................... 38
Fyfe Co. LLC ........................................ 40
Geopier Foundation Company.............. 39
Hayward Baker, Inc. .............................. 43
The IAPMO Group............................... 30
Integrated Engineering Software, Inc..... 13
Irvine Institute of Technology.................. 6
ITW Red Head ..................................... 23
KPFF Consulting Engineers .................. 15
Meadow Burke ...................................... 25
Mitsui USA ........................................... 36
Monotube ............................................. 34
NCEES ................................................... 9
NCSEA ................................................. 11
Powers Fasteners, Inc. .............................. 2
QuakeWrap, Inc. ................................... 35
PleAse suPPort these Advertisers
RISA Technologies ................................ 59
SAS Stressteel ........................................ 45
SidePlate Systems, Inc. .......................... 37
Simpson Strong-Tie............................... 21
StrucSoft Solutions, Ltd. ......................... 3
StructurePoint ....................................... 50
Struware, Inc. .......................................... 6
Subsurface Constructors, Inc. ................ 41
Wheeling Corrugating........................... 47

Call for Entries AdvErtising Account MAnAgEr

Interactive Sales Associates
NCSEA 2011 Excellence in Structural Engineering Chuck Minor Dick Railton
Awards Program Eastern Sales Western Sales
847-854-1666 951-587-2982
Entries for NCSEA’s 14th annual Excellence in Structural Engineering Awards Program are
sales@STRUCTUREmag.org
due July 22. Awards will be presented at the Renaissance Hotel in Oklahoma City on October
22, at the conclusion of the NCSEA Annual conference; and winning projects will be featured
in future issues of STRUCTURE magazine. For awards program rules and eligibility, as well
as entry forms, see the Call for Entries on the NCSEA website: www.ncsea.com.
EditoriAL stAFF
Executive Editor Jeanne Vogelzang, JD, CAE
execdir@ncsea.com

Erratum Editor Christine M. Sloat, P.E.

ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

The easiest to use software for calculating
wind, seismic, snow and other loadings for
IBC, ASCE7, and all state codes based on
these codes ($195.00).
Tilt-up Concrete Wall Panels ($95.00).
Floor Vibration for Steel Beams and Joists
($100.00).
Concrete beams with torsion ($45.00).
Demos at: www.struware.com
publisher@STRUCTUREmag.org
The caption for Figure 1 of May’s 2011 Associate Editor Nikki Alger
Outside the Box article, page 18, was publisher@STRUCTUREmag.org
incorrect. It should have read “Exterior. Graphic Designer Rob Fullmer
© 2011 Elon Schoenholz Photography”. graphics@STRUCTUREmag.org
Web Developer William Radig
webmaster@STRUCTUREmag.org
IRVINE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY STRUCTURE® (Volume 18, Number 6). ISSN 1536-4283.
C.V. Chelapati, Ph.D., P.E., F.ASCE
PE/SE License Seminars – Webcast – Nationwide/Worldwide
Publications Agreement No. 40675118. Owned by the
Guaranteed Pass or 1 year of free archives
National Council of Structural Engineers Associations and
NCEES, SE Vertical, SE Lateral – 16 hour published in cooperation with CASE and SEI monthly by C3
Also – PE (Civil), PEME, PEEE (Power), PEEE (Computer), PEEE (Electr), PE (Env), Ink. The publication is distributed free of charge to members
P (949) 585-9137 Surveying (FS, PS), PMP, Contracts and Legal, CA Seismic
and CA Survey
of NCSEA, CASE and SEI; the non-member subscription
F (949) 585-9126 www.irvine-institute.org rate is $65/yr domestic; $35/yr student; $90/yr Canada;
$125/yr foreign. For change of address or duplicate copies,
contact your member organization(s). Any opinions expressed

Editorial Board in STRUCTURE magazine are those of the author(s) and do not
necessarily reflect the views of NCSEA, CASE, SEI, C3 Ink, or the
STRUCTURE Editorial Board.
Chair STRUCTURE® is a registered trademark of National Council of
JonIITA. Schmidt, P.E.,
advertisement.indd 1 SECB Structural
5/10/2011 2:33:39Engineers
PM Associations (NCSEA). Articles may not be
Burns & McDonnell, Kansas City, MO reproduced in whole or in part without the written permission
chair@structuremag.org of the publisher.

Craig E. Barnes, P.E., SECB Brian W. Miller

CBI Consulting, Inc., Boston, MA Davis, CA National Council of Structural
Richard Hess, S.E., SECB Mike C. Mota, P.E. Engineers Associations
Hess Engineering Inc., Los Alamitos, CA CRSI, Williamstown, NJ
www.ncsea.com
Mark W. Holmberg, P.E. Evans Mountzouris, P.E.
Heath & Lineback Engineers, Inc., Marietta, GA The DiSalvo Ericson Group, Ridgefield, CT
C3 Ink, Publishers
Roger A. LaBoube, Ph.D., P.E. Greg Schindler, P.E., S.E. A Division of Copper Creek Companies, Inc.
CCFSS, Rolla, MO KPFF Consulting Engineers, Seattle, WA 148 Vine St., Reedsburg WI 53959
P-608-524-1397 F-608-524-4432
Brian J. Leshko, P.E. Stephen P. Schneider, Ph.D., P.E., S.E. publisher@STRUCTUREmag.org
HDR Engineering, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA BergerABAM, Vancouver, WA
Visit
Visit STRUCTURE magazine
STRUCTURE magazine on-line
onlineat
John A. Mercer, P.E. John “Buddy” Showalter, P.E. Visit STRUCTURE magazine on-line
www.structuremag.org at at
Mercer Engineering, PC, Minot, ND American Wood Council, Leesburg, VA
www.structuremag.org
www.structuremag.org

STRUCTURE magazine 6 June 2011

inFocus STEM
new trends, new techniques and current industry issues
By Greg Schindler, S.E.
I
write this shortly after the terrible earthquake/tsunami disaster in
Japan. That event will affect not only the lives of every Japanese
person, but also most everyone else in the world somehow. It
will certainly affect the structural engineering profession, as
more information is developed and studied in an effort to make our
constructed works more tolerant of natural disasters.
One of the more troubling images to come out of that horrific event
is the disturbing YouTube video of a young college student ranting
about the number of Asians in her school. Yes, there are a lot of foreign
students in American universities, particularly in the technical fields
like science, medicine and engineering. Since the beginning of the
last century, and probably even before that, students from all over
the world wanted to come to the United States to get a “first class”
education in the most technologically advanced nation on earth. But
the problem is NOT that foreigners are flooding our technical universi-
ties; the problem is that American students are NOT flooding them.
As I touched on in this column previously (Engineers and Shoe Strings,
STRUCTURE® magazine June 2008), the problem as I see it is that
Americans, particularly the upcoming “Millennial” generation, are
no longer impressed with technology. It is everywhere. There are few
places in the US where there is the kind of technological gap between
the very poor and the middle class that you might see in Africa or
China. You will not see images from the US of a man plowing a field
with oxen as a jet plane takes off nearby.
Consequently, unlike many parts of the world, in our advanced
nation no one is awed by technology any more. Few give a second
thought to how things come to be. Every high school student now has
a slab of plastic in his pocket that functions as a telephone, a camera,
a video camera, a music player, a radio, a TV, a calculator, a computer,
a GPS receiver, a game box and a myriad of other fantastic devices.
This was hardly imaginable even 10 years ago. The technologies in
your phone or laptop are truly mind-boggling. Even the ability of an
unthinking college student to record a video and instantly post it on
the Web, for people the whole world over to see, is not considered
to be amazing. It is becoming just another ordinary occurrence in
our modern society, where another new device or capability pops up
almost daily.
Is it any wonder that young folks these days have little interest in
things technical? They are totally immersed in technology that is
simply handed to them, ready to use right out of the box. There is
no longer an interest in finding out how a radio works by building
one in your basement. In fact, hardly anyone makes anything for
themselves as a hobby anymore. I believe that this has had an impact
on our business, as younger engineers seem not to have as much of
a sense for how to put things together and make them fit. They have
had little experience in actually making something.
STRUCTURE magazine
There is a lot of discussion these days about our education system
and how it is failing, especially when it comes to science and math.
I would submit that the basic things one needs to know in science
and math have not changed much since the time of the Apollo space
flights. What has changed is society’s inclination to pay attention to
them. There seems to be an irony in the fact that as a society gets
more technologically advanced, its citizens become less interested in
that technology.
Especially in the last 50 years, there has been an unimaginable explo-
sion of technology, and that explosion will continue at an exponential
rate. However, will America continue to be the techno-leader in the
future? Possibly not, if the upcoming generations are not interested
in science and engineering.
By now you must be thinking that these are the ramblings of a member
of the “boomer” generation, and you would be right. However, I would
suggest that much of today’s technology was invented by boomers and
advanced “Gen X’ers”. But those generations failed to keep alive the
general societal interest in the technical fields. The early Millennials
are now coming into positions of influence. Will they continue the
slide, since they are the first generation to have lived in the digital age
from birth? Many books have been written recently on how to deal
with this new generation entering the work force. That is another
subject altogether.
There are encouraging things happening. There is more discussion
these days about how to get the youngest of the Millennial genera-
tion, those still in primary school, to pay more attention to science
and math. As with everything these days, there is an acronym for
this – STEM, for science, technology, engineering and math. Some
school districts are starting special STEM programs or constructing
STEM buildings to concentrate on these subjects. Still, the change
needs to be societal and not just left as yet another burden on our
school systems. If a general societal shift could start the swing back
toward a greater interest in STEM, that may be the trigger needed
to initiate the next generation. According to those that study these
things, “named” generations change only after a major societal change
causes a shift in the way children are raised that results in a difference
in their attitudes.
We as engineers can do our part. Do not miss any chance you get
to impress upon kids – and adults – that everything they take for
granted in modern life is the result of scientific research, technological
refinement and engineering development.▪
Greg Schindler, S.E. is an Associate in the Seattle office of KPFF
Consulting Engineers. He serves on the Editorial Board of
STRUCTURE magazine and is a Past President of NCSEA. Greg
can be contacted at gregs@kpff.com.
7 June 2011
Structural In the first of this two-part series (STRUCTURE® January 2011), we discussed the first

PracticeS
seven of sixteen key skill sets that engineers in a structural engineering practice should have
in order to achieve results and make significant contributions to a firm. Those seven skill
sets followed the broad theme of technical skills. In Part 2, we explore the broad theme
of management skills.
As discussed in Part 1, younger structural engineers tend to be task-oriented, whose
practical knowledge beyond metrics might include: How many hours did I work this week? Was my day filled
the textbook with productive work? Did I complete my assignment on time? Was the input data
on my structural model correct? As those younger engineers grow and become more
experienced, some will be interested in becoming results-oriented engineers, whose
measurable metrics might include new clients, profit, revenue, problem solving, good
risk management, creative solutions, etc.

E
ach of the following nine skill sets has a set of
questions intended to make you think. These
are followed by some suggested ways to get
better at the associated skill set.

Ability to Manage or Direct the Work of

Becoming a Results-Oriented Others, Mentoring Skills, Management Skills,
Structural Engineer and People Skills

Part 2: Management Skills
By John P. Miller, P.E., S.E.
John P. Miller, P.E., S.E. is a Principal
with KPFF Consulting Engineers, St.
Louis, MO. He may be contacted at
john.miller@kpff-stl.com.
Are you seen and used as an internal resource?
Do you routinely teach others? How well
do you manage and direct other engineers
and drafters? Are you approachable and easy
to talk to? How well do you communicate
verbally? Are you easy to get along with? Do
you act professionally and knowledgeably in
a project meeting?
• Routinely visit with engineers and
drafters working for you to review the
project status, ask questions, answer
questions, guide decisions, etc.
Ability to Manage Budgets and Set Profitable Fees
How efficiently do you work? How aware
of the budget progress are you? How do
you manage the time of drafters and other
engineers? How do you deal with a problem
budget? Have you ever given input regarding
the project fee? Do you know what it takes to
produce a particular size/type project? What is
a fair fee and will this win the project? Do you
know what fees the market will bear? What
can you offer to your client that will make
you stand apart from other firms?
• Learn to work quickly and accurately.
• At least twice a month, review the
status of the project budget and make
• Develop an area of expertise and
become a resource.
• Be curious about other people’s projects
and discuss them together, even if you
are not associated with that project.
• Be open and approachable to answer-
ing questions others may have
• Act professional and cordial at all times.
• Learn to speak in front of peers or
clients in meetings or in giving presen-
tations with clear, concise language.
sure everyone on the team is aware of
the budget status.
• If a budget is heading for trouble, act
on it immediately.
• Read the proposal or contract, and be
sure you and everyone else working on
the project knows what is included in
the scope and what is not.
• Be aware of “scope creep” and make the
client aware of this immediately.
• Ask for additional services when appro-
priate, and do so as soon as possible.
• Consider taking a time management or
project management class or seminar.

8 June 2011
Knowledge of Proposals and Contracts,
Liability Consciousness, and Risk Management
Can you write a tight proposal with a well
defined scope of work? Can you excel in an
interview or proposal presentation? Do you
read and understand the contract? Do you
understand the Terms and Conditions part of
a contract? Do understand your firm’s insur-
ance coverage? Do you know how to manage
a dispute? Do you know what words to avoid
in correspondence? Do you understand the
• Read and understand your firm’s stan-
dard Terms and Conditions.
• Read DPIC’s “Lessons in Liability”
firm’s liability associated with field reports, booklet.
correspondence, e-mails, and reports? Do • Review your firm’s Certificate of
you understand Risk Management? Insurance and know what coverage you
• Read every proposal you can to gain an have and what it means.
understanding of variations. • Always try to manage disputes through
• Read and understand the American discussion first.
Institute of Architects (AIA) C401- • If a problem exists on a project, be
2007, AIA B101-2007, and any other proactive in solving the problem, even
“custom” contracts you can find. if it was not caused by you.

Ability to Understand Projects from • What percentage does the structure

Owner’s and Contractor’s Perspectives
How well do you understand the
Contractor’s schedule concerns and con-
sequences of not meeting the schedule?
Do you understand the sub-contractor’s
role? Where does the money for a project
come from? How does the structural work
fit into the big picture? Why do Owners
have a budget to hit?
• Ask contractor why the shop drawings
need to be turned around so fast.
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
• Review and understand detailed cost
estimates for a project.
• Understand the differences between a
contracting contingency, a design con-
tingency, and an owner’s contingency.
How much should they be?
• Find out if and how the owner is
financing a project.
• What is a bond issue and how does it
affect your firm’s workload?
account for in the total cost of the
project? Does this vary from project
type to project type? Why?
• Become proficient in determining
approximate material quantities.
• Gain an understanding of construc-
tion costs for all types of materials and
building types.
• Study project schedules and lead times
to see what elements of the building
have to be ordered by the contractor
first in order to build the project.
continued on next page

STRUCTURE magazine 9 June 2011

 Construction Knowledge
and Practicality
Do you understand how a project gets built
(who designs concrete formwork, what is
a mill order, how is a wall braced, what is
re-shoring, how is concrete finished, how
does OSHA affect your work, is field welding
cheaper than field bolting, how does concrete
get placed, etc.)? Can you develop details
that are economical and easy to construct in
the field? Are you familiar with construction
tolerances? How well do you interact and col-
laborate with the field? What is the difference
between Design/Build and Design/Bid/Build,
and how does this affect our work?
• Visit job sites as often as possible–
observe and ask questions.
• Visualize how something that is drawn
physically gets built.
• Spend some time building stuff.
• Read the AISC Code of Standard Practice,
ACI 301, OSHA Standards, etc.
• Observe all construction projects wher-
ever you are.
• Become familiar with the general con-
tractors and subcontractors in your area.
Client Management,
Client Communication,
and Client Satisfaction
Who is the client? How well do you manage
client expectations? Is the client kept well-
informed of the project status? Do you make
commitments and how do you keep them? Is
the client happy during and after the project?
Will the client return? Are you developing
long-term relationships with clients?
• Do what you promise to do.
• Keep the client (architect, mechanical
engineer, civil engineer, owner, contrac-
tor, internal clients, etc) informed of your
needs so you can all meet schedules.
• If a schedule or a commitment is in
jeopardy for some reason, discuss this
with the client immediately.
• Seek to understand your client’s business.
• Do not be afraid to make a commit-
ment – just make sure to keep it.
• Your goal is to have a happy client that
returns – exceed their expectations.
• If there is a problem on a project, be
proactive in solving the problem, even
if it was not caused by you.
• Develop long-term relationships with
clients – people change firms and you
never know where it may lead you.
STRUCTURE magazine
Commitment to the Good
of the Office or Firm
Are you aware of the financial performance
of your firm or office? How can you affect
the overall success of the office? Why is good
financial performance desirable? In what ways
do you add value to the office? Do you care
about the perpetuation of the firm or office?
Do you sometimes have to make personal
sacrifices for the benefit of others and the
office as a whole?
• Workload is usually cyclical but man-
power is generally constant. Therefore,
it is sometimes necessary to work extra
hours in a week to meet deadlines and
keep clients happy.
• Seek to understand your office’s and
firm’s financial performance and how
you can affect it.
• Cover for coworkers when vacations or
other commitments prevent them from
meeting project and client demands.
• Recognize and offer to help others
when they seem to be struggling.
• Always try to promote your firm with-
out being pushy or aggressive.
Ability to Make Good
Decisions on Your Own
Do you know when to ask a question, and
when not to ask and figure it out yourself? Do
you have the confidence and good judgment
to make a decision? Would you say you possess
a lot of “common sense?” Do you understand
the effects of your decisions? Are you willing
to take responsibility for your decisions?
• Know when to ask questions, particu-
larly of the Engineer of Record.
• Understand that when you make a
decision you are accountable for
that decision.
• Try to take emotions out of decision
making.
• When it is appropriate to ask a ques-
tion, try to be prepared with your
own answer.
• Think about the consequences of your
decisions. What does this do to the
construction cost and design budget?
How does this affect the schedule?
Does this help the project? Is this
someone else’s decision to make? Do I
need input from others?
• Use past experiences to guide you.
• Know when to research and when to
just ask someone so as not to reinvent
the wheel.
10 June 2011
Level of Ownership
Taken on Projects
Do you care about the quality of the docu-
ments you send out the door? If there is a
problem on one of your projects, do you
step up to help find a solution? Do you take
responsibility for the budget on your proj-
ects? Do you know how to set and maintain
a schedule? Do you care about a project if
you are only helping out on it short-term?
Do you keep the Engineer of Record (EOR)
informed of the project status? Do you think
your responsibility stops at the discipline
border? Would the client want to hire you
on the next project? Do you take pride in
your work?
• Problems are a normal part of our
business. When you encounter one, do
not just show up with the problem, but
show up with a good solution.
• When a problem occurs, work to
resolve it immediately. Doing so
usually prevents little problems from
becoming big problems.
• Pay attention to details.
• Keep a close watch on project progress
to assure that the schedule and budget
can be met.
• Keep the EOR informed, and involve
the EOR in any major decisions.
• Seek to publish your work.
Successful engineering firms not only need
engineers who are technically excellent at what
they do, but they also need well-rounded
engineers who can manage people, risk, and
projects effectively, represent their firm profes-
sionally, and view the Big Picture. Mastering
the sixteen technical and management skill
sets discussed in this two-part series should
help round out your ability to make a signifi-
cant contribution to the success of your firm
and help achieve results.▪
online
All past issues
News, Events, Book Reviews,
Letters to the Editor and more!
www.STRUCTUREmag.org
Pass Structural Exam
thE

with confidEncE!
Prepare for exam day success with this new course designed by the National
Council of Structural Engineers Associations (NCSEA), Kaplan Engineering
Education, and leading structural engineers from across the industry.

The exam underwent significant changes in April 2011, making it even more
challenging. Be prepared with our online exam review course!

NCSEA Structural Engineering Exam Live Online Review Course

The targeted review includes:
- Over 28 hours of instruction with
an emphasis on building design
- New sessions on exam strategy and
bridge design
- Key topics of structural code
- Efficient analytical methods
- New material in the 16-hour
Structural exam
- Typical exam questions
- Problem solving techniques
- Exam day skills
- 24/7 playback – study anytime

Every registered student will receive a Structural Engineering Learning

System – a $194.95 value – FREE with the course. This system includes
an updated Structural Engineering License Review Problems & Solutions
textbook containing the new material added to the 16-hour Structural exam.

Live Online Course Dates:

July 23 & 24 - Vertical Forces Review
August 6 & 7 - Lateral Forces Review
Course Fee: $1199 | Vertical or Lateral Only: $749

REgiStER tODAy! 1-800-420-1432

www.kaplanaecengineering.com/livereview
ConstruCtion
issues
discussion of construction
issues and techniques
Accommodating Movement
in High-Rise Wood Frame
Building Construction
By Richard W. Howe, P.E.
Richard W. Howe, P.E. is a licensed
professional engineer in Memphis,
Tennessee, with over 30 years experience
performing forensic analysis of building
performance issues. He may be reached at
rwhowe@earthlink.net.
This article was previously published in
the Wood Design Focus, Fall 2010. It is
reprinted with permission.
E
ase of construction and favorable
overall costs relative to other con-
struction types are making high-rise
(i.e., 4- and 5-story) wood frame
construction increasingly popular. With
these buildings increasing in height, there is a
greater impetus on designers to address frame
and finishes movement in such construction.
As we all know, buildings are dynamic crea-
tures experiencing a variety of movements
during construction and over their service life.
In wood frame construction, it is important
to consider not only absolute movement but
also differential movement between dissimilar
materials. As the number of stories increases,
paying attention to shrinkage of materials
has increased in importance. At the upper
building stories, it is possible for allowable
shrinkage to be exceeded resulting in distress
to exterior finishes. Further, distress repaired
during the construction period or early in
the building’s service
life sometimes reap-
pears each time it is
remedied.
This article focuses
on differential move-
ment issues and how
to recognize their
potential and avoid
problems by effective detailing. These prob-
lems are generally well-addressed in literature
and therefore, those who fail to address them
are vulnerable to the repercussions of having
to deal with them. This article does not
address structural design and detailing for
shear walls and connectors in typical wood
frame structures. Distress to finishes is seldom
critical structurally but can be a major issue
with owners, since the nature of the cause is
ongoing (e.g., continued shrinkage of wood
or growth of brick).
Shrinkage
An important issue is wood shrinkage and
an appreciation of not only its magnitude
but also its differential character relative to
other common materials present in wood
frame construction. Construction types often
using mixed materials include multi-family
residential, dormitories, hotels, etc., Hybrid
materials are also often seen in mixed-use
commercial and, especially, in the increas-
ingly popular wood frame-over-podium
construction.
Wood shrinkage is well addressed in lit-
erature. A great place to start is Chapter 4
of the Wood Handbook (USDA). Shrinkage
is principally of interest in the cross-grain
direction (radial or tangential). Longitudinal
12 June 2011
shrinkage along the length of typical dimen-
sional lumber members is often negligible.
An article by Joseph Lstiburek also provides a
good overview of shrinkage and other sources
for wood frame movement noting “zones of
(shrinkage) movement” focused at floor fram-
ing. Additional articles addressing primarily
structural considerations, but also detailing
issues regarding movement accommodation,
include the following:
• Multi-Storey Wood-Framed Structures:
Requirements for Building Beyond Four
Storeys provides a good overview of
literature addressing the issues.
• Four-story Wood-frame Structure over
Podium Slab is a Woodworks-sponsored
case study addressing frame shrinkage
in seismic design with numerous inter-
esting references. See also the errata.
• 5 over 1 Hi-Rise Podium Structures
(Matteri) is a California-focused
presentation.
• Hold Down Systems Key to Shear
Wall Performance provides a Wood
Shrinkage Table for different classes of
frame construction.
The latter two articles refer to “settling” or
“settlement of construction gaps”, which is
the closing of gaps in dimensional lumber
framing also known as “framing take-up” and
an additional factor also contributing to frame
shortening. The latter article also suggests
consideration of axial creep shortening of
wood framing especially for lower level studs
subjected to the relatively high loads of 4- and
5-story framing. Axial creep versus creep of
flexural members has not been rigorously
addressed in literature. Intuition says that it
may also contribute ⅛ inch or even ¼ inch
to the shortening of lower stories.
The International Building Code (IBC) 2009
Section 2304.3.3, addresses shrinkage concerns
for multi-story wood frame construction:
2304.3.3 Shrinkage. Wood walls and
bearing partitions shall not support
more than two floors and a roof unless
an analysis satisfactory to the build-
ing official shows that shrinkage of the
wood framing will not have adverse
effects on the structure or any plumb-
ing, electrical or mechanical systems, or
other equipment installed therein due
to excessive shrinkage or differential
movements caused by shrinkage. The
analysis shall also show that the roof
drainage system and the foregoing sys-
tems or equipment will not be adversely
affected or, as an alternate, such systems
shall be designed to accommodate the
differential shrinkage or movements.
However, it is apparent that the emphasis is
on performance of building structure and
equipment and not architectural detailing
issues impacting finishes or joints and joinery
of materials, etc.
It is interesting to note that certain Canadian
jurisdictions have codified consideration of
wood frame movement specifically for high-
rise wood frame construction. Note that 6
stories are now permitted in some Canadian
jurisdictions. British Columbia puts the issue
of design to accommodate movement on the
designer as opposed to the contractor. While
generalized specification language deferring
that responsibility on contractors might be
legally enforceable, the end result is always a
dog fight where all parties end up losers. The
cited document also provides some sound
recommendations for avoiding or minimizing
shrinkage-related issues.
Wood Shrinkage Overview
Key factors influencing the magnitude of
wood frame shrinkage are:
• Pre-construction moisture content
(MC), which will typically be
higher than equilibrium (in-service)
moisture content (EMC)
whether due to pre-delivery
MC (specifications and off-
site storage) or on-site storage
conditions, and the simple
fact that typical buildings are
tempered (typically by air
conditioning). For example,
lumber delivered to a job may be
at a moisture content of 19% or
connection “take-up” – as much as ⅛ inch
per floor or cumulatively as much as ½ to
¾ inch at the top floor of a high-rise wood
framed building. Also, although not well
documented, some would argue that “creep”
(long term movement under sustained load-
ing) contributes (albeit a small contribution
for compressive creep – e.g., axial shortening
of load-bearing wood studs – perhaps in the
range of ⅛ to ¼ inch per story with magni-
tude progressively increasing from lower to
upper stories). Flexural creep deflection may
be of interest locally if the project features
longer span wood flexural members support-
ing framing above, and then the magnitude
varies with position of the concentrated load
in the span. Flexural creep is not of interest
where framing is not supported by beams or
other flexural framing.
Mixed Materials
The important thing to recognize is that
cumulative shrinkage is the issue – not absolute
values per floor or story. This is especially of
interest when considering differential move-
ment between wood frame elements and other
materials, especially those that:
“I really like the fact that you actively support and communicate
directly with your clients on a regular basis, and that you are
1) do not shrink at all (steel framing or
steel/cast iron piping, such as plumb-
ing stacks), or
2) shrink much less (concrete masonry,
such as is often used in stair and
elevator shafts), or
3) worst of all, materials that actually
expand, such as brick commonly
used in veneers for facility types for
which high-rise wood frame con-
struction is often used. Like wood
shrinkage, brick growth (and issues
relative to differential movement with
wood framing) is well addressed in
the literature. See Brick Institute of
America’s (BIA) Tek Note #18 covers
the analysis and effects of movement.
Brick detailing must be effectively addressed
in high-rise wood frame over podium con-
struction where brick veneers can effectively
extend two or even more stories below the
supported wood framed superstructure. One
method to address differential shrinkage is
independently supported brick on shelf angles
with soft joints below them. Otherwise, deter-
mination of cumulative differential movement
between shrinking wood frame and grow-
ing brick veneer could be based on 6, 7, or

ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

15% kiln-dried for commercial
construction, or perhaps regular guys like us…I KNOW that you are accessible.”
higher depending on storage
conditions. As the completed David D. Kampe, P.E.
air conditioned building reaches ddk Engineering
environmental equilibrium, the
in-service EMC in wood framing
is generally assumed to be on
the order of 8-10% and, hence,
the wood framing is subject to
inevitable shrinkage.
• Cumulative thickness of cross-
grain wood contributing to
shrinkage (plates, dimensional
joists, fabricated open-web Wood post and beam / log truss restaurant design by David Kampe
wood truss top chords, etc.).
Wood species has relatively little
impact since most species used IES, Inc Visit www.iesweb.com
519 E Babcock St.
in commercial construction have Bozeman, MT 59715 Free-trial downloads, demo
800-707-0816
similar shrinkage properties. info@iesweb.com movies, and pricing.
As noted previously, a complete assess-
ment also would consider wood framing

STRUCTURE magazine 13 June 2011

Table 1: Wall movement summary of a 4-story wood over 2-story CIP concrete parking structure
• Avoid plates and fillers, especially
w/aligning exterior walls (all units in inches).
stacked plates, except where abso-
Total per Cumulative lutely necessary.
Shrinkage Take-Up Creep story at each story • Consider use of pressure-treated wood
or engineered wood such as LVL at
6th story 0.2500 none none 0.2500 1.8750 such locations, since the treatment
5 story
th
0.2500 0.0625 0.1250 0.4375 1.6250 process results in moisture contents at
4th story 0.2500 0.0625 0.1250 0.4375 1.1875 or below in-service EMC.
• Consider a single top plate (with
3 story
rd
0.2500 0.1250 0.2500 0.6250 0.7500 appropriate structural design and
2 story (conc)
nd
0.0625 N/A Negligible 0.0625 0.1250 detailing considerations).
1 story (conc)
st
0.0625 N/A Negligible 0.0625 0.0625 • Consider floor framing with engineered
wood framing such as I-joists or engi-
neered open web trusses where only the
Brick growth (at 5 x 10-4 per BIA recommendations) thickness of the top and bottom chords
At 18 months (60%) Ultimate contribute to shrinkage.
• Matteri suggests consideration of bal-
Growth in story Cumulative Growth in story Cumulative
loon framing with floor construction
6 story
th
0.0360 0.1944 0.0600 0.3240 supported by hangers, thus avoiding
5th story 0.0360 0.1584 0.0600 0.2640 plates and floor framing inserted into
wall framing.
4 story
th
0.0360 0.1224 0.0600 0.2040
The above considerations can reduce cumu-
3 story
rd
0.0360 0.0864 0.0600 0.1440 lative wood frame movement by a factor of
2 story (conc)
nd
0.0216 0.0504 0.0360 0.0840 50% or more. Half the battle is won.
1 story (conc)
st
0.0288 0.0288 0.0480 0.0480
The most effective way to avoid distress to
finishes arising from cumulative differential
Per story differential – interior wall movement vs. brick growth movement of wood frame relative to finishes
At 18 months Ultimate is to be acutely aware of the fact that there
will be differential movement and conscien-
Diff at Diff at
tiously address detailing and specifications
Framing Brick each story Framing Brick each story
to minimize distress to finishes. Consider
6th story -1.8750 0.1944 2.0694 -1.8750 0.3240 2.1990 where that is likely to occur and provide
5 story
th
-1.6250 0.1584 1.7834 -1.6250 0.2640 1.8890 details to relieve it or avoid it.
4 story
th
-1.1875 0.1224 1.3099 -1.1875 0.2040 1.3915
3 story
rd
-0.7500 0.0864 0.8364 -0.7500 0.1440 0.8940 Classic conditions to be addressed include
2 story
nd
-0.1250 0.0504 0.1754 -0.1250 0.0840 0.2090 the following:
(conc) • Windows in exterior walls – Such win-
dows often serve as the bridge between
1st story -0.0625 0.0288 0.0913 -0.0625 0.0480 0.1105
shrinking wood frame and growing
(conc)
brick veneer. BIA Tek Note 18A,
Accommodating Expansion of Brickwork,
also points to the need for expansion
8 cumulative stories of uninterrupted brick Note that in Table 1, the 3rd through 6th
joints (soft joints) around windows
subject to expansion. stories reflect a 4-story wood frame struc-
(and doors) projecting into the veneer.
Table 1 presents a representative analysis of ture supported by a 2-story podium (concrete
• Floor framing interfacing with unyield-
story-by-story cumulative wood frame shrink- parking structure). Detailing of the brick
ing materials or components – Such
age, followed by a companion analysis of veneer without effective soft joints resulted
materials and components include
brick growth and the cumulative differential in cumulative differential brick growth being
concrete or CMU stair or elevator shaft
between the two. Time frames of 18 months assessed for a 6-story stack of brick.
walls, steel framing, plumbing stacks,
post-installation and ultimate (long term)
flues and chimneys, etc.
are considered. Needless to say, it is hard to
accommodate 2 inches or more of differen-
Detailing Tips • Interior load-bearing wood stud walls
with doorways located immediately
tial movement between interior framing and The most effective way to detail the project to
adjacent to intersecting exterior non-
brick veneer in the uppermost stories unless reduce cumulative shrinkage is to minimize
load bearing walls with brick veneer
the designer has provided effective details the cumulative width/depth of wood framing
– This unique condition invites never
to accommodate it. Better yet, the designer members subject to (cross-grain) shrinkage,
ending distress to finishes at door
should consider effective material specs to or specify materials less subject to shrinkage
header corners. An example of such a
reduce movement. where necessary:
condition is shown in Figure 1.

STRUCTURE magazine 14 June 2011


NON LOAD-BEARING EXTERIOR WALL
WITH BRICK VENEER
LOAD-BEARING INTERIOR WALL
(SUPPORTS FLOOR AND ROOF
FRAMING)
Figure 1: Interior load-bearing wood stud walls with doorways
located immediately adjacent to intersecting exterior non-load
and juxtaposed against
dimensionally stable mate-
rials. For example, new
wood framing abutting
an existing wall – whether
wood or masonry – with X2
finishes bridging the X1
interface between the
two. This is not unlike the
classic architectural gaffe
of floor, wall, or ceiling
finishes crossing a struc-
tural building expansion
joint. When buildings (or
adjacent materials or com- X2

bearing walls with brick veneer invites problems at header corners. ponents) move relative to X1
one another, the finishes
• Conditions where brick veneer wraps bridging the gap will show distress unless spe-
corners or parapet walls – This condi- cial details are provided. Figure 2: Lipped brick is an effective way to
tion often exists at exterior balconies or address soft joints.
porches or similar conditions where the
primary brick façade is supported on a
Conclusion
non-yielding foundation (foundation In summary, the importance of architectural
wall or perhaps even prior existing brick detailing to avoid distress to finishes cannot
as in a vertical expansion) and the brick be overstated. The failure to recognize the
façade at the porch or patio is supported potential for and to provide construction
on (shrinking) wood framing. Distress details to accommodate such movement can The online version of this article
will likely occur unless effective detailing be a source of headaches, management over- has detailed references. Please visit
is provided to permit differential move- head, and strained relationships with owners, www.STRUCTUREmag.org.
ment across the interface. contractors, and fellow design professionals.▪

The importance of soft joints or details

serving to “panelize” the exterior façade
– especially if made of brick, masonry,
or any finish not subject to shrink-
age – to each story, hence shielding
it from the effects of story shrinkage
and especially cumulative shrinkage,
cannot be overstated.

ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

In Design and Detailing of Expansion
Joints in Clay Brick Veneer, G.A. Dalrymple
points to the use of lipped brick as an effec-
tive way to address soft joints (Figure 2).
This is perhaps the most effective, if not
only way, to address the classic problem
of typical 5�16- and ⅜-inch shelf angle
outstanding legs while maintaining the
standard ⅜-inch mortar joints and achiev-
ing a soft joint. Even this detail calls for
special attention to compressibility of seal-
ants vs. anticipated movement.

Existing Construction
The preceding discussion has generally
focused on new construction. Existing
construction presents an obvious situation
where new wood framing may be placed
in the context of existing construction

STRUCTURE magazine 15 June 2011

Structural
Performance
performance issues relative
to extreme events
Figure 1: Special Design Figure 2: Standard for Hurricane
Provision for Wind and Resistant Construction, SSTD-10
Seismic (SDPWS), 2008. published by the Southern Building
Code Congress International.
I
t is well known that wood structural
panel shear walls can be constructed
to simultaneously resist shear forces
and uplift forces due to wind. With
publication of the American Wood Council’s
(AWC) Special Design
Provision for Wind and
Use of Wood Structural Panels Seismic (SDPWS) in
2008 (Figure 1), this
to Resist Combined Shear and concept of using nail
connections to resist
Uplift from Wind both shear and uplift
was codified by the
wood design com-
By Paul Coats, P.E. and Brad Douglas, P.E.
munity. Section 4.4 of the SDPWS now
contains tabulated values for the uplift
capacity of certain wood structural panel
shear walls, with a list of requirements for
installation and illustrations for nailing. The
capacities are based on provisions in the 2005
AWC National Design Specification® for Wood
Construction (NDS®) and have been verified
by full scale testing.
Paul Coats, P.E. (pcoats@awc.org) is the
The primary characteristic of this method
Southeast Regional Manager and Brad
is increased nailing of panels to framing to
Douglas, P.E. (bdouglas@awc.org) is the
provide a continuous load path and enabling
Vice President of Engineering with the
uplift loads to be transferred to existing wall
American Wood Council.
anchorage at the foundation.
Need For Fewer Tie-Downs
A desire to investigate the inherent uplift
capacity of nailed wood structural panel shear
walls was the impetus for development of this
design method.
In the last two decades, as design standards
have evolved to address losses associated with
high-wind events, designers and home build-
ers have been challenged by the substantially
“beefed up” methods and equipment required
to resist wind forces. Among concerns are the
number of tie-downs required for shear walls,
which can present both cost increases and
practical construction challenges. Traditional
16 June 2011
Figure 3: ICC’s Standard for
Residential Construction in
High-Wind Regions, ICC
600, published in 2008.
methods of providing for uplift resistance
with additional tie-downs at shear walls can
be cumbersome and expensive.
Recent and Current
Prescriptive Engineered
Design Tools and Standards
Model codes and standards have played a
part in the evolution of the methodology and
its incorporation into SDPWS. In order to
address the high costs of wind damage in high
wind events, particularly in hurricane-prone
regions of the southeast, building officials,
the building industry, and the insurance
industry have encouraged and supported
development of prescriptive design tools
and standards for residential construction in
high-wind areas. Emphasis has been on the
use and substantiation of prescriptive docu-
ments that are easily applied by designers and
builders, easily enforced by code officials,
and are completely consistent with the most
current loading criteria in the International
Code Council’s (ICC) International Building
Code (IBC), the International Residential Code
(IRC), and the American Society of Civil
Engineer’s (ASCE) Minimum Design Loads
for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE 7.
The progression of prescriptive, yet engi-
neering-based, documents began with
publication of the Standard for Hurricane
Resistant Construction, SSTD-10 (Figure 2),
by the Southern Building Code Congress
International in 1990. Although compre-
hensive in regard to materials, the standard
contained provisions for resisting wind loads
only, and it did not address other design
considerations such as earthquake, flood, or
gravity loads. An update of that standard was
published in 1999.
A comprehensive standard encompassing all
structural loadings for buildings in high wind
 Figure 4H Panel Splice Occurring over Horizontal Framing Member
Figure 4H Panel Splice Occurring over Horizontal Framing Member

Double
top plates
Double Panel attachment
top plates to upper
Panel top plate
attachment
(see
to Figure
upper top 4G)
plate
(see Figure 4G)

Nailing provided in
horizontal
Nailing framing
provided in

44
horizontal framing
member (single or
Band Joist member (single or
double row)
Band Joist double row)

1/2" Spacing Spacing

1/2"1/2" Spacing Panel edge 3/4" Spacing Panel edge

LAtERAL FORCE-RESIStINg SYStEMS

1/2" Panel edge 3/4" Panel edge

LAtERAL FORCE-RESIStINg SYStEMS

Spacing
Spacing

Figure 4: In 2001, AWC published the national

version of the Wood Frame Construction Manual Bottom Panel attachment
(WFCM) for One- and Two-Family Dwellings, Bottom
plate
plate
Panel
to
attachment
to bottom
bottom
(see Figure
plate
plate
4G)
based on all gravity, snow, seismic, and wind loads Foundation
(see Figure 4G)
Double row of fasteners
Double row of fasteners
Single row of fasteners
Single row of fasteners
Foundation
specified by the first edition of the IBC (2000).
Figure
Figure5a:4AWC’s Special
I Panel DesignOccurring
Splice Provision foracross
Wind and Seismic (SDPWS), 2008 Figure 4H.
Studs
Figure 4I Panel Splice Occurring across Studs
regions was needed. As a result, SSTD-10 has
since been succeeded by the ICC’s Standard for
Double
Residential Construction in High-Wind Regions, Double
top
topplates
plates
Panel attachment
Panel
to upper
attachment
upper top
top plate
plate
to
ICC 600 (Figure 3), published in 2008. (see Figure
(see Figure 4G)
4G)

Prior to publication of the ICC 600 stan-

dard, the Institute for Business and Home Increasestud
Increase
nailingfor
stud
foruplift
uplift
nailing
Safety (IBHS) published a version of the (eachside
(each sideofof
horizontaljoint)
horizontal joint)
SSTD-10 standard that broadened the appli- Panel
Panel edge
edge
Band
BandJoist
cation to more coastal areas of the southeast Joist Nailing provided
Nailing
in studs
in
provided
studs on
on each
each
U.S. with higher wind speeds than originally side of
side of
horizontal joint
horizontal joint
3/4"
3/4"
Spacing
Spacing
addressed in SSTD-10, as a stop-gap for use in (for
(forshear
shear
wall
walldesign)
design)
the state of Florida, in cooperation with ICC.
The concept of using wood structural panel Blocking,
Blocking,
species
species
same
asas
same
toptop
shear walls to resist uplift forces had been and
and
(2x
bottom
bottom
flatwise
(2x
plates
plates
shown)
flatwise shown)
incorporated into the SSTD-10 standard, Increase
Increasestud
studnailing
nailingfor
foruplift
uplift
and later into ICC-600 with few changes. Bottom
(each
(eachside
sideofofhorizontal
horizontaljoint)
joint)
Bottom
Incorporation of these provisions in SDPWS plate
plate
38
Panel
Panel attachment
lateRalto
to
attachment
foRCe-Resisting
bottom
bottom plate
plate sYstems
completes the codification with some modifi- Foundation
(see
(see Figure
Figure 4G)
4G)
Foundation
cation to the earlier provisions. This will now
serve as the basis for continued development Figure 5b: 4J
AWC’s Special Design Provision forForeST
Wind&&PAPer
and Seismic (SDPWS), 2008 Figure 4I.
Figure Sheathing Splice Plate
AmericAn (Alternate Detail)
ASSociATion
of prescriptive provisions for combined shear/ AmericAn ForeST PAPer ASSociATion

uplift resistance.
In 1995, AWC (previously the American
Forest & Paper Association) published the
first version of the Wood Frame Construction
Manual (WFCM-SBC), a comprehensive,
engineered, and prescriptive standard for 2x flatwise
wood frame construction based on high blocking
Panel
wind loads specified in the 1994 Standard
A edge
Building Code (SBC). In 2001, AWC pub-
lished the national version of the Wood Frame
Construction Manual (WFCM) for One- and
Two-Family Dwellings (Figure 4), based on all 3/4"
A
gravity, snow, seismic, and wind loads speci-
fied by the first edition of the IBC (2000). Spacing Sheathing splice
Supplying both engineering criteria as well as (single row plate, same
Sheathing
shown) thickness and
prescriptive framing tables and diagrams, the splice plate
face grain
WFCM complimented prescriptive framing
orientation as
provisions of the IRC and was referenced by
sheathing
that code for buildings in high wind regions,
and was also adopted by certain states in the Section A-A
south as mandatory for wood frame residen-
tial construction in high wind zones. Figure 5c: AWC’s Special Design Provision for Wind and Seismic (SDPWS), 2008 Figure 4J.
continued on next page

STRUCTURE magazine 17 June 2011

 5. Wood structu
speCial design pRovisions foR Wind and seismiC edge distance
39

speCial design pRovisions foR Wind and seismiC 39

Table 4.4
Table 1: AWC’s Special Design Provision for Wind and Seismic (SDPWS), 2008 Table 4.4.1.
The 2001 WFCM does not contain provi- Table 4.4.1 Nominal Uplift Capacity of 7/16" Minimum Wood Structural Panel
sions for walls designed to resist combined Sheathing
Table 4.4.1 Nominalor Siding
Uplift Capacity When ofUsed
7/16"for Both Wood
Minimum ShearStructural
Walls and Wind Uplift
Panel
shear and uplift; however, ICC 600 and the Simultaneously
Sheathing or Siding over FramingWhen Used with a Specific
for Both Shear Walls Gravity and of Wind 0.42 or
Uplift
2001 WFCM are formatted so that shear walls GreaterSimultaneously
1 over Framing with a Specific Gravity of 0.42 or
Greater
1

resisting combined uplift and shear can be used

in conjunction with the prescribed loads in Nail Spacing Required for Shearwall Design
Nail Spacing Required for Shearwall Design
6d Common Nail 8d Common Nail 8d Common Nail 10d Common Nail
WFCM. Efforts are being made to incorporate 6" panel
6d Common Nail
edgeedge
6" panel spacing
spacing 6"6"
8d Common Nail
panel
paneledge spacing 4"4"
edge spacing
8d Common Nail
panel
panel edgeedge spacing
spacing
10d Common Nail
6" edge
6" panel panel edge spacing
spacing
prescriptive shear wall designs into the 2012 12" field spacing
12" field spacing 12"
Alternate
field spacing
12" field spacing 12" field spacing
12" field spacing 12"
12" field field spacing
spacing
AlternateNail
Nail Spacing
Spacing atatTop
Top and
and Bottom
Bottom PlatePlate
EdgesEdges
edition of the WFCM, which will contain 6" 6" 4" 4" 3" 3"
Uplift
6"6"
Capacity(plf)
(plf)of
4"
4"
of Wood
3"3"
Wood Structural
6" 6"
Panel
4" 4" 3" 3" 6"
Sheathing or Siding
6" 4" 4"
3" 3"
4 2,3

tables for combined shear and uplift wood

2,3
Uplift Capacity Structural Panel Sheathing or Siding
Nails- Nails-
structural panel walls for each wind region. Single
Single Row 0
0
168
168
336
336
0
0
4
216
216
432
432
NA
NA
0
0
216
216
0
0
262 524
262 524
4
Row Nails-

LAtERAL FORCE-RESIStINg SYStEMS

Nails- Double 336 672 1008 432 864 1296 216 648 1080 524 1048 1572
5

Progression of Provisions Double Row 336

Row
5
672 1008 432 864 1296 216 648 1080 524 1048 1572

1. Nominal unit uplift capacities shall be adjusted in accordance with 4.4.1 to determine ASD allowable unit uplift capacity and LRFD factored unit resistance.
1. Nominal shall unit upliftincapacities
accordanceshall
with be
thisadjusted in accordance with 4.4.1nail
to determine
dimensions. ASD allowable unit uplift capacity and LRFD
Uplift capacity tables for wood structural 1. Nominal
Anchors
2. unit uplift
factored
Where framing
be installed
capacities
unit shallgravity
has resistance.
a specific beAnchors
adjusted in
of 0.49shall
section. See
accordance
be installed
or greater,
Appendix A for
uplift with 4.4.1
in accordance
values in table
common
to 4.4.1
determine
with ASD
this
shall be allowable
section.
permitted unit uplift
Seemultiplied
to be Appendix capacity
A
by 1.08. and LRFD
for common nail factored unit resistance.
dimensions.
panel sheathing or siding when used for both 2.
Anchors3. shall
Where nail size is 6d common or 8d common, the tabulated uplift values are applicable to 7/16"dimensions.
2.
Where framing
be
Where
installed
cies of has
framing
pliesahaving
in
specific
accordance
has
gravity
a specific
with
a specific
of 0.49
gravity
this
gravity
section.
of 0.49
or greater,
of 0.49
See
uplift
or greater.
Appendix
orvalues
Where
greater,
nail in
A
table
size
for
uplift
common
values
4.4.1
is 10d common,
nail
shallinthe
betable minimum OSB panels or 15/32" minimum plywood with spe-
4.4.1 to
permitted shall
tabulated uplift
be permitted
bevalues
multiplied totobe15/32"
by 1.08.
are applicable
multiplied by 1.08.
minimum OSB or
shear and uplift in the ICC 600 standard 3. Where nail 3. Where
plywood
size 6dnail
iswith size is
a species
common 6d
8dcommon
oforplies common, or 8d
having a specific
the common,
gravity
tabulated ofupliftthe
0.49 or tabulated
greater.
values upliftwith
Forapplicable
are plywood values
7/16"are
to other applicable
species,
minimummultiply
OSB topanels
the 7/16" minimum
tabulated
or uplift
15/32"valuesOSB panels
by 0.90.
minimum plywood
1.
or with spe-
Nominal unit
cies of 4. Wood
plies 15/ structural
having
32" minimum panels gravity
a specific shall overlap
plywood the top
of with
0.49 or member ofWhere
greater.
species the double
of plies nail top
having a plate
size and common,
is 10d
specific bottom plate bytabulated
gravity ofthe0.49 1-1/2" anduplift
a single
or greater. row ofare
values
Where fasteners
nail shall be
applicable
size is 10d placed
15/32"¾"
to common, from
minimum
the OSB or
are identical to its predecessor, SSTD-10. a species of plies having a specific gravity of 0.49 or greater. For plywood with other species, multiply the tabulated uplift values byAnchors
the panel edge.
plywood with 0.90. shall
tabulated
5. Wood structuraluplift
panels values are applicable
shall overlap the top member to 15/
of 3the
2" double
minimumtop plateOSB or plywood
and bottom plate bywith
1-1/2".a Rows
species of pliesshall
of fasteners having
be ½"aapart
specific
with agravity
minimum of
However, the newer ICC 600 standard 4. Wood structural panels
edge distance of shall overlap
½". Each the top
row shall havemember ofspecified
nails at the the double
0.49 or greater. For plywood with other species, multiply the tabulated uplift values by 0.90.
the panel edge.
top plate and bottom plate by 1-1/2" and a single row of fasteners shall be
spacing. 2.placed
Where ¾" from
framin
directly references prescriptive tables in the 5. Wood structural
4. Wood panels shall overlap
structural panelsthe topoverlap
shall memberthe of the
topdouble
member top of
plate
theand bottom
double topplate byand
plate 1-1/2". Rowsplate
bottom of fasteners
by 1-½" shall
andbea½" 3.with
apartrow
single The tabulated
ofa minimum
edge distance of ½". Each row shall have nails atthe
the panel
specified spacing. wood with oth
WFCM for selection of initial shear wall fasteners shall be placed ¾" from edge.
Table 4.4.2 Nominal Uplift Capacity of 3/8" Minimum Wood Structural Panel 4. Wood structu
5. Wood structural panels shall overlap the top member of the double top plate and bottom plate by 1-½". Rows of fasteners
design and the determination of uplift pres- Sheathing or Siding When Used for Wind Uplift Only over Framing the panel edge
shall be ½" apart with a minimum edge distance of ½". Each row shall have nails at the specified spacing.
with a Uplift Specific Gravity of of0.42 or Minimum
Greater
1
sures, naming the appropriate WFCM tables Table 4.4.2 Nominal Capacity 3/8" Wood Structural Panel 5. Wood structu
in the text. In addition, specifications for Sheathing or Siding When Used for Wind Uplift Only over Framing edge distance
6d Common Nail 8d Common Nail 10d 1Common Nail
anchor bolt spacing, and washer dimensions with a Specific Gravity
edge spacingof6"0.42 orspacing
Greater
and installation details, are provided in ICC
Testing6" panel 12" field spacing
panel edge
12" field spacing
6" panel edge spacing
12" field spacing
Alternate Nail Spacing at Top and Bottom Panel Edges
600 (and subsequently in the 2008 SDPWS) Consideration of panel 6d nailing
6"
Common
4"forNailresist- 8d Common
3" 6" 4"• allNail horizontal10djoints
3" 6" 4"
Common must
3"
Nail occur over 2,3
Uplift Capacity (plf) of Wood Structural Panel Sheathing or Siding
– requirements that became necessary when ing combined uplift Nails-
and
6" shear
panel edge had
12" field spacing
spacing been 6" panel edge framing
spacing
12" field spacing
members
6" panel or
edge blocking
12" field spacing
spacing

the results of full-scale testing showed the used by engineering Row

analysis
Single 320 and 480 appeared
Alternate
4
640 416
Nail Spacing at624• sheathing
Top 832Bottom
and 500is attached
Panel 750
Edges1000 at top plate and
6" 4" 3" 6" 4" 3" 6" 4" 3"
occurrence of excessive cross-grain bending in early editions ofNails- SSTD-10 prior to any bottom or sill plates of walls 2,3
Double Uplift
640 Capacity960 (plf) of Wood
1280 832 Structural
1248 1664Panel 1000
Sheathing 1500or Siding
2000
of the bottom plate under combined loading. formal testing.Nails- Testing
Row was encouraged by 5 • anchor bolts must have a maximum
Specific provisions for the transfer of uplift IBHS in order to substantiate
Single 320 480 retention
4
640 416 624spacing 832 of 500 16 inches 750 and be designed to
1000
Row shall be adjusted in accordance with 4.4.2 to determine ASD allowable unit uplift capacity and LRFD factored unit resistance.
1. Nominal unit uplift capacities
forces across horizontal joints in the sheath- of Anchors the provisions
shall be installed induring an
accordance with update
this section. See of the
Appendix A for commonresist combined
nail dimensions. wind shear and uplift;
2. Where framing has a Nails-
specific gravity of 0.49 or greater, uplift values in table 4.4.2 shall be permitted to be multiplied by 1.08.
ing were new in SDPWS. Whereas SSTD-10 standard 3. The tabulatedprior to are
uplift Double
values 2005. 640One
applicable wood1280
to 3/8"960
minimum
5
struc-
OSB panels832 withwashers
or plywood1248 1664
species are
of plies a minimum
1000
having ofsize
1500gravity 2000
a specific ofgreater.
0.49 or 0.229 For ply-
wood with other species,Row multiply the tabulated uplift values by 0.90.
and ICC 600 required horizontal joints to tural 4. Woodpanel manufacturer,
structural panels Norbord,
shall overlap the top member had
of the double top plate and bottomxplate
3 xby 31-1/2"
inches, extending
and a single row of fasteners to shallwithin
be placed ¾" from
occur over framing members, there was no conducted
1. Nominal
the panel edge.
5. unit
Wooduplift
structural
initial
capacities
panels shall
testing
shalloverlap
be adjusted
atmember
the top in
theofNational
accordance with 4.4.2
the double to and
top plate determine
½-inch
ASDbyallowable
bottom plate
of the
1-1/2". Rows
bottom
unitofuplift capacity
fasteners
plate
shall beand
edgefactored
½" LRFD
apart with
on theunit resistance.
a minimum
specific guidance for certain common circum- Association
Anchors edge distance
shall be installed ofaccordance
of ½".inEach
Homebuilders
row shallwith
havethis
nailssection.
Research
at the specified
sheathed side
spacing. A for common nail dimensions.
See Appendix
2. Where framing has a specific gravity of 0.49 or greater, uplift values in table 4.4.2 shall be permitted to be multiplied by 1.08.
stances such as joints occurring at mid-story Center,
3. The tabulated and areinapplicable
uplift values 2006to 3/8" with minimum APA-The
OSB panels or plywood• with sheathing splices
species of plies havingmust occur
a specific gravityatofdesigned
0.49 or greater. For ply-
wood with other species, multiply the tabulated uplift values by 0.90.
over blocking between studs. Section 4.4.1.7 Engineered Wood Association entered horizontal members or blocking
4. Wood structural panels shall overlap the top member of the double top plate and bottom plate by 1-1/2" and a single row of fasteners shall be placed ¾" from
designed
of SDPWS requires that where horizontalthe panel jointly
edge. into an additional testing program for shear transfer, or a tension splice
5. Wood structural panels shall overlap the top member of the double top plate and bottom plate by 1-1/2". Rows of fasteners shall be ½" apart with a minimum
joints occur over blocking between studs (asedge distance
at Clemson
of ½". Each University.
row shall have Testing
nails at thesubstantiated
AmericAn
specified of the same thickness and grade as the
ForeST & PAPer ASSociATion
spacing.
opposed to other horizontal framing members the concept and design methodology, but sheathing must be provided
such as a floor band joist), nailing at the studs some adjustments were necessary in regard • in general, 3-inch single row spacing or
above and below the joint must be designed to to specifications for anchor bolt installa- 6-inch double row spacing of fasteners
transfer uplift across the joint. Alternatively, tion, in order to provide for resistance of at panel edges is required, with mini-
use of sheathing tension splices in conjunc- cross-grain bending of bottomAmericAn plates,ForeST mum clearances to panel edges
as & PAPer ASSociATion
tion with blocking is permitted with certain mentioned above. • uplift forces on framing around
conditions. See Figures 5a, b, and c (page 17). window and door openings must be
Whereas SSTD-10 and ICC 600 assume addressed by the use of conventional
ASD design methods, the uplift capacity table
Overview of Combined uplift anchors at the sides of openings.
in SDPWS (Table 1) shows nominal values Shear and Uplift Provisions Typically, the designer would choose a shear
that must be modified by the ASD reduction wall design by conventional calculations or
factor or the LRFD resistance factor. Footnote
in the SDPWS table methods for the determined shear, and
adjustments to table values accounting for Requirements for wood structural panels then determine uplift forces on the wall by
wood species are indicated by ranges of spe- designed to resist combined shear and uplift calculation or using prescriptive methods from
cific gravities in the SDPWS, whereas species from wind include the following (see Section the WFCM, based on building geometry. Once
group designations, defined in accordance 4.4.1 of the SDPWS for complete details): the uplift force is known, the designer can enter
with the NDS, were used in SSTD-10 and • wood structural panels must have a Table 4.4.1 of the SDPWS to find a wall with
retained in ICC 600. minimum thickness of 7/16-inch the needed uplift capacity, verifying that the

STRUCTURE magazine 18 June 2011

ural panels shall overlap
2. Where thea specific
framing has top member of orthe
gravity of 0.49 double
greater, top plate
uplift values andshall
in table 4.4.1 bottom plateto be
be permitted bymultiplied
1-1/2".by Rows
1.08. of fasteners shall be ½" apart with a minimum

ORCE-RESIStINg SYStEMS

StINg SYStEMS
e of ½". Each row nail
3. Where shall
size have nails orat8dthe
is 6d common specified
common, spacing.
the tabulated uplift values are applicable to 7/16" minimum OSB panels or 15/32" minimum plywood with spe-
cies of plies having a specific gravity of 0.49 or greater. Where nail size is 10d common, the tabulated uplift values are applicable to 15/32" minimum OSB or
plywood with a species of plies having a specific gravity of 0.49 or greater. For plywood with other species, multiply the tabulated uplift values by 0.90.
4. Wood structural panels shall overlap the top member of the double top plate and bottom plate by 1-1/2" and a single row of fasteners shall be placed ¾" from
the panel edge.
5. Wood structural panels shall overlap the top member of the double top plate and bottom plate by 1-1/2". Rows of fasteners shall be ½" apart with a minimum
4.2 Nominal Uplift Capacity of 3/8" Minimum Wood Structural Panel
edge distance of ½". Each row shall have nails at the specified spacing.
Table 2: AWC’s Special Design Provision for Wind and Seismic (SDPWS), 2008 Table 4.4.2.
Sheathing or Siding When Used for Wind Uplift Only over Framing
Table 4.4.2 Nominal Uplift Capacity of 3/8" Minimum Wood Structural Panel
with a Specific Gravity of 0.42 or Wind
Greater
1
Sheathing or Siding When Used for Uplift Only over Framing
with a Specific Gravity of 0.42 or Greater
1

6d Common Nail Nail

6d Common 8d8d Common
Common Nail Nail 10d Common 10d
Nail Common Nail
6" panel edge spacing
6" panel edge spacing 6"6" panel edge
panel edge spacing
spacing 6" spacing
6" panel edge panel edge spacing
12" field spacing 12" field spacing 12" field spacing
12" field spacing 12" field
Alternate Nail Spacing spacing
at Top and Bottom Panel Edges 12" field spacing
Alternate
6" 4" Nail3"Spacing 6" at4"Top and3" Bottom
6" Panel2,33"Edges
4"

6" 4" Uplift Capacity

3" (plf) of6" Wood Structural Panel Sheathing or Siding
4" 3" 6" 4" 3"
Nails- 2,3
Uplift
Single Capacity
4
320 480(plf)640
of Wood
416 Structural
624 832 Panel
500 Sheathing
750 1000or Siding
Row
Nails- Nails-
Single 320Double
Row
5
640
480 960
640 1280 832
416 1248
624 1664 1000
832 1500
500 2000
750 1000
4
Row
Nails-
1. Nominal unit uplift capacities shall be adjusted in accordance with 4.4.2 to determine ASD allowable unit uplift capacity and LRFD factored unit resistance.
Anchors shall be installed in accordance with this section. See Appendix A for common nail dimensions.
Double
2. Where 640 gravity of960
framing has a specific 1280
0.49 or greater, uplift values 832 1248
in table 4.4.2 shall 1664
be permitted 1000
to be multiplied by 1.08. 1500 2000
5 uplift values are applicable to 3/8" minimum OSB panels or plywood with species of plies having a specific gravity of 0.49 or greater. For ply-
Row
3. The tabulated
wood with other species, multiply the tabulated uplift values by 0.90.
4. Wood structural panels shall overlap the top member of the double top plate and bottom plate by 1-1/2" and a single row of fasteners shall be placed ¾" from
1.the
Nominal unit uplift capacities shall be adjusted in accordance with 4.4.2 to determine ASD allowable unit uplift capacity and LRFD
panel edge.
uplift capacities
5. Wood shall
factored bepanels
structural
unit adjusted
resistance. in accordance
shall overlap
Anchorsthe top member
shall ofwith
be installed 4.4.2
the double to determine
top plate
in accordance
edge distance of ½". Each row shall have nails at the specified spacing.
and with
bottomthis ASD
plate allowable
by 1-1/2".
section. SeeRows unitA for
uplift
of fasteners
Appendix shall be capacity
common½" apart with
nail and LRFD
factored unit resistance.
a minimum
dimensions.
l be installed2.inWhere
accordance
framing has with this section.
a specific gravity ofSee
0.49Appendix
or greater, A forvalues
uplift common nail
in table dimensions.
4.4.2 shall be permitted to be multiplied by 1.08.
ng has a specific
3. Thegravity
tabulatedofuplift
0.49values
or greater, uplift to
are applicable values in tableOSB
3/8" minimum 4.4.2 shallorbe
panels permitted
plywood to be multiplied
with species bya 1.08.
of plies having specific gravity
d uplift values of are0.49
applicable
or greater.to For3/8" minimum
plywood OSB
with other panels
species, or plywood
multiply with uplift
the tabulated species of by
values plies having a specific gravity of 0.49 or greater. For ply-
0.90.
her species, 4.
multiply the tabulated
Wood structural upliftoverlap
panels shall valuesthebytop0.90.
member of the double top plate and bottom plate by 1-½" and a single row of
ural panels shall overlap
fasteners shallthe
be top member
placed ¾" fromofthethe double
panel edge. top plate and bottom plate by 1-1/2" and a single row of fasteners shall be placed ¾" from
ge. 5. Wood structural panels shall overlap the topAmericAn memberForeST
of the &double top plate and bottom plate by 1-½". Rows of fasteners shall
PAPer ASSociATion

ural panels shall be overlap

½" apart the
withtop memberedge
a minimum of the double
distance topEach
of ½". plate
rowandshallbottom plate
have nails byspecified
at the 1-1/2".spacing.
Rows of fasteners shall be ½" apart with a minimum

ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

e of ½". Each row shall have nails at the specified spacing.

wall chosen has nailing that exceeds what is walls and diaphragms to resist lateral
required for shear design alone. loads
AmericAn ForeST & PAPer are now required to comply with the
ASSociATion
Uplift capacities in Table 4.4.1 must be SDPWS, in accordance with Section 2305.1
modified by either the ASD reduction factor of the IBC.
of 2.0, or the LRFD resistance factor of 0.65,
depending on the design method chosen.
This method also provides for the use of
Conclusion
wood structural panel walls designed to resist AWC’s SDPWS now contains provi-
uplift alone (Section 4.4.2 of the SDPWS). A sions for wood structural panel shear
separate table (Table 2) gives uplift capacities walls designed to resist shear and uplift
when minimum 3/8-inch thick sheathing or simultaneously, and wind uplift alone.
siding is used. These provisions are based primarily on
APA – The Engineered Wood Association increased perimeter nailing of standard
has published design examples in APA thickness wood structural panels to top
System Report SR-101B Design for and bottom plates, and specific require-
Combined Shear and Uplift from Wind ments for panel splices. Similar provisions
and Technical Note E510A Using Wood appeared in the SSTD-10 and the ICC-
Structural Panels for Combined Uplift and 600 standards for residential construction.
Shear Resistance. Derivation of values in SDPWS provisions contain all necessary
SDPWS Table 4.4.1 can be found in the design criteria to apply this methodology
commentary material at the back of the to any wood structure regulated by the
SDPWS standard. ICC codes and designed in accordance
with provisions of the NDS. Design
examples are readily available on indus-
Broadened Application try websites.▪
Whereas previous standards are limited in
scope to residential structures, the incor-
This article was previously published in
poration of the combined shear/uplift
the Wood Design Focus, Summer 2010.
methodology in SDPWS broadens applica-
It is reprinted with permission.
tion of this method to other than residential
structures. All structures using wood shear

STRUCTURE magazine 19 June 2011

Guest O
ne of the very few drawbacks
of working for the Council
on Tall Buildings and Urban

Column
Habitat is that most of your
friends have problems remembering how
to properly pronounce its tongue-breaking
acronym, CTBUH. Things would have been
a lot easier if the founders would have stuck
dedicated to the to the focus of tall buildings, but the aware-
dissemination of information ness that the space in between tall buildings
from other organizations is just as important as the buildings them-
selves justified its extended name. Actually,
when looking at tall buildings today, we
might consider rebranding the organization
as the Council on Tall Buildings, Urban
Habitat, Superstructures, Urban Intensity,
Iconic Structures, Sustainability and Social
Environment. However, if we were to adopt
that, we would be left with no friends at all,
I’m afraid. But it would definitely reflect what
tall buildings are all about.
The Council was
founded in 1969 as

Drivers of Innovation
By Jan Klerks
Jan Klerks is the Communications Manager
of the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban
Habitat. He is the editor of the CTBUH
Journal and has built the online tall
buildings database. Jan may be contacted
at jklerks@ctbuh.org.
a Joint Committee
of the American
Society of Civil
Engineers (ASCE)
and the International Association for Bridge
and Structural Engineering (IABSE) in an
effort to evaluate and coordinate significant
and international tall buildings research. In
those early days, given the scope of the two
fostering organizations, it was very much a
‘tech boys’ club in which the cultural aspects
of tall buildings were hardly addressed. It was
simply assumed that tall buildings exist to
cope with urban growth, and that it was up to
the engineers to solve the technical problems
that came with that.
In those days, the future was always bigger
and brighter. Visions of the future imagined
smiling people who are swiftly getting around
in airborne cars and happily living in shiny,
supertall structures connected by skybridges.
It’s the time in which superstructures emerged
in the American cityscape, such as the Sears
(Willis) Tower, John Hancock Center and
Standard Oil building (Aon Center) in
Chicago and the World Trade Center towers
in New York City. Building taller called for
technical innovations never seen before,
which is one of the most exciting aspects
of tall buildings; superstructures as drivers
of innovation for architects, engineers and
developers, who want to build taller, newer
and better than ever before.
But doing something new also means
bumping into problems which haven’t been
discovered yet. After some recent visits to
Russia, I learned that one of the big issues
Empire State Building. Courtesy of Jan Klerks.
they encounter there is that their building
code wasn’t written with the development of
modern tall buildings in mind. Thus, develop-
ers find themselves constantly bickering with
local authorities over the interpretation of
the code, or struggle to change the codes or
adopt new ones as they continue to develop.
However, the size of tall building projects
allow developers to invest time and money
into solving new problems. Tall buildings, in
this context, are drivers of innovation.
Although usually taken for granted, struc-
tural safety has always been a big issue in the
engineering of tall buildings. Over the course
of time, this profession has often reinvented
itself when it comes to tall buildings. Roman
emperors Julius Caesar, Augustus and Nero
all set maximum building heights for ancient
Rome, as tall structures had a rather large ten-
dency to plummet. In the middle ages, towers
would regularly collapse because of structural
failure or natural disasters, such as lightning.
The European historic cityscape is scattered
with unfinished towers that never reached
their originally indented height because the
structure started to lean during construction.
continued on page 22

20 June 2011
 Drive Us
anywhere and everywhere

Fasten your tool belts. Simpson Strong-Tie has hit the accelerator with its offering of high-performance
fasteners. Our new and extensive line of premium stainless-steel screws and nails offer corrosion
resistance and a long life span from frame to finish. Our Quik Drive ® collated screws are designed
for many different applications, including roofs, subfloors and decks. And our selection of structural
fasteners continues to increase with our new Strong-Drive ® SD structural-connector screws and
stainless-steel SDS screws. For the most complete line of fasteners that can be driven anywhere and
everywhere, make sure your projects include Simpson Strong-Tie.
To see all of our innovative fastener solutions, visit www.strongtie.com/fasten or call (800) 999-5099.

© 2011 Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc. FASTEN10-E

Student Design Response from the Antony Wood Studio on Tall Buildings in the context of Mumbai, India.
Courtesy of CTBUH.
For centuries, towers were iconic and power-
boasting incidents in the urban landscape.
It wasn’t until late in the 19th century that
several technical inventions gave rise to a more
utilitarian use. The development of the safe
passenger elevator, the introduction of iron
and, later, steel framing and new lighting
systems all helped trigger the era of the sky-
scraper. Several buildings have been singled
out as the first skyscraper in an American con-
text because of the height-related structural
or technical inventions they incorporated: the
Equitable Building in New York as the first
building to use elevators as a means for the
construction of tall buildings, the Tribune
Building and the Western Union Building in
New York (both completed in 1875) for being
the firsts buildings to use passenger elevators
and the first to show the actual number of
stories of the building on the exterior. The
Home Insurance Building in Chicago (1885)
is recognized for being the first building that
made full use of steel framing technology
The 20th century has introduced many new
drivers for tall buildings. The most rational
reason to build tall is to cope with urban
density and high land prices. In theory, city
centers are considered as places that make
sense for tall buildings because that’s where
everyone wants to be, so the demand for space
is high. To some extent, this rationale is cor-
rect. In island states such as Singapore and
Hong Kong, space is a scarce commodity
which cannot easily be solved through effi-
cient urban transport or sprawling outwards.
In these cases, tall buildings are indeed an
economic necessity.
Rapid economic and social development can
also be a driver for tall buildings. Having to
STRUCTURE magazine
cope with millions of people migrating from
the countryside to the cities looking for a better
life, China finds itself in a position in which it
needs to develop housing by the hundreds of
thousands, fast. Tall buildings in this context
are a product of economies of scale, structural
efficiency and reproducibility. It reminds us
of the time in which tall buildings, or flats as
Europeans call them, were built to offer afford-
able yet quality social housing in developed
countries in the mid 20th century. However,
some of these developments eventually created
more social problems than they ever solved, Willis Tower. Courtesy of Antony Wood.
and it will be interesting to see how they will
develop over time in the new economies.
But there are also numerous cases in which
tall buildings are a sought-after and exclusive
piece of real estate. This could be regarded as
the difference between a tall building and a
skyscraper; both are tall but the latter aspires
to stand out and be tall. The current world’s
tallest, the 828-meter (2,717-feet tall) Burj
Khalifa in Dubai, was not built because the
desert is so expensive. It was built as a symbol
of Dubai as an emerging global hub, and also
as a focal point for the Burj Dubai develop-
ment area. It is doubtful, however, if the tower
itself is a big money maker. The better profit
is most likely to be found in the development
of the surrounding area, which can be mar-
keted as a front row seat with free exposure to
the media outings generated by the building.
Structurally, the Burj Khalifa relies on proven
strategies such as the tripod principle and the
tapered shape. However, the extreme height
and scale of the project was cause for many
improvements and enhancements to existing
practical knowledge and procedures. Not only
will designers inevitably bump into exciting Home Insurance Building. Courtesy of Norman
Ramsay Collection.
22 June 2011
new problems when going to a height that has
never been done before, but known problems
become exponentially more problematic when
building very tall. This might explain why
one of the larger meeting rooms inside the
Burj Khalifa’s construction office was dubbed
‘The War Room’.
Burj Khalifa is clearly an excellent example
of the idea that the height of a building is
primarily limited by the depth of the pockets
of those who wish to make a statement. The
statement as a driver appears to be impor-
tant in the Middle East, where cities are
manifesting themselves through tall build-
ings that come in some very artistic forms
especially when it is visible, as long as it
is the most efficient solution. It just adds
to the architecture. The message is that in
this iconic age, the engineers really should
be credited for realizing the imagination of
the architects.
A recent theme which the tall buildings
world has embraced is sustainability. Now
here is a topic that we all can agree is a
respectable and a timely one. Unfortunately,
sustainability is also a bit of a slippery topic.
One train of thought reasons that skyscrapers
are good for sustainability because tall build-
ings increase urban density, which can create
an incentive for walkable spaces and the use
of public transport. Other sources point out
that tall buildings contain relatively more
embodied energy in the materials than in
low-rise buildings. In all, the author believes
that we just don’t know whether tall build-
ings are sustainable by nature. But there is
definitely a timely challenge to engineers to

The Results
and shapes. One may genuinely wonder,
however, if the number of buildings with
an iconic presence is not devaluating the
meaning of that driver in the first place.

Are In…
Tall buildings that stand out because of
their height and iconic presence can be
a showcase of engineering if you know
how to look at them. Chicago’s Willis
Tower is an excellent example of a bun-
dled tube system, which was developed
O ur Epcon G5 Epoxy out performs the competition
to significantly reduce steel usage while in outdoor applications with excellent spacing and edge
simultaneously increasing floor plan distance data – making it the most versatile adhesive
efficiency. The architecture of Chicago’s suitable for extreme weather conditions. After further
Hancock Center is formed by its expres- extensive examination and testing, the ICC Evaluation
sive structural system and gentle sloping

ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

façades. By expressively showing these Service certifies the G5 Epoxy now complies with the
strategies, the structure becomes the 2009 International Building Code.
architecture. The danger with that is any
subsequent building which adopts the
same structural approach may be con- Now Meets 2009
sidered a reproduction, especially among IBC Requirements
architects who typically strive for a unique
individual expression.
Today we’re living in an age of iconic
towers that curve, twist, bend, shear and
generally look like sculptures or look like
they are technically impossible. Such
projects are becoming popular in cities
wishing to make a statement, typically
in some of the emerging countries. A
“starchitect” who is known for renounc-
ing the classic tower in favor of buildings
which are instantly recognized by their
iconic shape is Rem Koolhaas of the
Rotterdam-based Office of Metropolitan
Architecture. In the 2008 documen-
tary, “A Kind of Architect”, Koolhaas
explains the ‘context-free’ building, and,
interestingly, introduces the structural
engineer, Cecil Balmondis of Arup: the
guy who makes it all possible. Together
Concrete Anchoring Solutions
they coined the phrase ‘stupid but smart’,
which refers to the idea that it’s okay if a
structural system looks a bit unorthodox, Securing America’s Infrastructure Since 1910 www.itwredhead.com

Red Hd 1.3-Half Pg Isld-HR.indd 1 5/10/11 8:40 AM

STRUCTURE magazine 23 June 2011
 or roughly 1,000 feet. The term
Megatall is making its way into
popular culture as an indicator
of tall buildings over 600 meters
(or approximately 2,000 feet). At
the 2009 Chicago conference,
architect Eric Kuhne introduced
the term Starcatcher to label his
1,001 meter tall Burj Mubarak
Al Kabir project in Kuwait.
Yet another development in tall
buildings refers to the introduc-
tion of tall buildings, or even
groups of tall buildings, which
don’t stand out because of their
vertical prominence but more
so because of their horizontal
development. The 2009 over-
all winner of the CTBUH Best
Tall Building award, the Linked
Hybrid Complex in Beijing, and
the 2010 winner for the Best
Tall Building Asia & Australasia
region, Singapore’s Pinnacle@
Bologna Towers. Courtesy of Norman Ramsay Collection. Duxton, are great examples of
both the relationship tall build-
design structures which use materials even ings are establishing with their horizontal
more efficiently than they already do. environment and the social environments
Some have chosen to make a big visible state- which are created.
ment, such as incorporating wind turbines in Looking at the output of various academic
the design or putting trees on roof tops. As tall building studios around the world, we see
the monetary gains of these features appear another emerging trend towards remarkably
to be hard to translate into actual numbers, ‘open’ skins – as if these buildings are trying to
the danger is that future generations might open up to the city that surrounds them. This
judge this as simply a fashion statement. But is a very positive development; hopefully, the
there are also a number of less exposed and students of today will be able to realize their
less sexy strategies out there which are holistic, ideas as the architects of tomorrow.
smart and sensible. Fortunately, because of In light of these developments, we are wit-
Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, we all know that nessing the birth of a tall building type which
less can also mean more, so financially there doesn’t just scrape the sky. Perhaps more in
definitely is an incentive to regard the costs common with the already-familiar term
of sustainable practices as an investment in groundscraper (as a building or podium that
future cost savings. It is interesting to notice extends its horizontal connection with the
how greening has become an extra incentive to ground), more and more buildings will try to
preserve and refurbish buildings where their open up to the city on all levels. Maybe in the
qualities have been distinctive and become future, we will call these buildings cityscrapers
part of architectural heritage. The recent green or urbanscrapers. Whatever their name, it is
retrofit program of the Empire State Building exciting to see that the tall building is again
in New York City is a good example of that. a frontrunner in the way we shape our cities.
Looking at the history of tall buildings, we Looking back and forth at tall buildings of
can also predict their future. One observation the past and present, one tenet continues to
is that, as buildings continue to grow taller, hold true for the many people involved, and
we’re now at a point where we need to coin especially for the engineers – tall buildings
new phrase. Roughly based on a numeri- challenge your knowledge, wisdom and, above
cal coincidence, the term Supertall is already all, your creativity. That’s probably the main
being used for buildings over 300 meters, reason why we find them so fascinating.▪

Burj Kahlifa. Courtesy of Peter Weismantle, Chicago.

STRUCTURE magazine 24 June 2011

 Hidden talents.
HALFEN Curtain Wall Connections.

Burj Khalifa, Dubai (UAE)

Safe, quick, flexible

Since their original launch in 1929, HALFEN
Cast-in Channels have become the preferred
alternative to drilling and welding for connec-
tion solutions in buildings around the world.

Multifunctional
Used in a multitude of construction
All-purpose & practical applications such as high rise buildings,
curtain wall façades, stadiums, tunnels
and many more, HALFEN Channels
provide numerous advantages such as:
▪ no drilling needed, thus no damage
to the concrete and reinforcement
▪ adjustable system permits flexible
installation
▪ fast and time-saving installation
▪ highest quality standards ensure
Simple installation – Burj Khalifa excellent reliability
▪ design and technical support provided by
more than 40 specialized engineers

HALFEN
Cast-in Channels

High-grade & safe

HALFEN Anchoring Systems · Meadowburke Products · PO Box 547 · Converse · TX 78109

Phone 800.323.6896 or 210.658.4671 · Fax 888.277.1695 or 210.658.7908 · info@halfen.com · www.halfen.com · www.halfenusa.com
3344 Peachtree/Sovereign
Atlanta, Georgia
By Clinton O. Rex, Ph.D., P.E. and Rachel Lancaster, E.I.T.

3
344 Peachtree/Sovereign is Atlanta’s most unique mixed-use development. Soaring
644 feet, it is the tallest building in the Buckhead Skyline and the tallest constructed
in Atlanta in almost 20 years. The 50-story tower’s asymmetrical and fluid design
results in more than just another building, but instead an architectural sculpture in
the heart of Buckhead. The project is highlighted by its unique exterior surface leans and
curves, thus creating a building in which every floor is a different shape and size. The tower’s
more than 1.2 million square feet of floor space incorporates 510,000 square feet of office,
20,000 square feet of retail, 12 levels of parking, 82 luxury residences and upscale dining.

Structural System Summary drilled pier having

its own rock bear-
The primary structural system for 3344 Peachtree/Sovereign consists
ing capacity, which
of cast-in-place reinforced concrete. Shear walls and moment frames
varied between 60
comprise the lateral load resisting system. The shear walls are linked
and 125 ksf. The
to perimeter columns at two levels, thus reducing the core’s slender-
revised foundation
ness and producing a more economical design.
design eliminated
To avoid sloping columns, some columns were stepped at each level at
all double drilled 3344 Peachtree/Sovereign, Atlanta.
the same amount that the floor moved. This met the architectural needs
piers and allowed
while providing typical rebar and form systems. This stepping creates
the project to remain within budget and on schedule.
transfer forces at each floor that were carefully designed and detailed.
As part of the project, a parking deck was constructed next to the
The shape changes in the floor plate were resolved using cantilever fram-
main tower. The lowest level of this parking deck is two stories below
ing systems of thickened slabs alone or in combination with cantilever
the lowest level of the main tower, with the two being separated by an
beams. If beams were used, the forms were kept in the same line for all
expansion joint. Architectural considerations dictated that the parking
floors such that the floor changes could occur by simply re-using the
deck and tower columns along this joint needed to align. This resulted
same form as construction progressed up the building.
in both columns having to rest on one common foundation. Typically,
The office space consists of long span beam and girder systems,
the foundation would be installed at the lowest level of the deck;
allowing tenants to have flexibility with large column free space. The
however, this would have required that the parking deck excavation be
residential floors consist of two-way flat plate construction with more
complete before the main tower columns could be started. This would
closely spaced columns. Therefore, the slab serves as the floor of one
have led to a substantial schedule delay given that the tower, not the
space and the ceiling of another, thus minimizing floor to floor heights.
parking deck, was on the critical path to completion. The solution
The superstructure is supported by drilled piers with diameters
was to install the common foundation from the main tower’s lowest
ranging from 30 to 120 inches. Despite the height of the building,
level and then use the drilled pier as a column for the two lower levels
foundation tension loads were small enough that the drilled pier
of the parking deck. The tricky part of this solution was that when
foundation did not require expensive rock sockets or rock anchors. The
the deck was excavated, it would expose 25 feet of drilled pier. This
small tension loads were the result of a carefully balanced structural
combined with a 20-foot tall first story tower column would result in
system that fully utilized the entire building weight to counteract
the overturning forces. The tension loads that did exist were easily
transferred to the rock mass below via friction between the drilled pier
and the partially weathered rock that the drilled piers pass through
before reaching the auger refusal bearing rock.

Drilled Pier Foundations

Initial geotechnical explorations revealed that the rock quality varied
substantially over the building site; and, the subsequent recommenda-
tions indicated that the erratic nature of the rock would only allow
the design team to use 60 ksf bearing capacities at the bottoms of the
drilled piers. Initial foundation designs resulted in two drilled piers
at every column, creating significant budget and schedule problems.
The design team overcame this obstacle in two ways. First, it was
determined that 10-foot diameter drilled piers could be installed;
common practice in Atlanta was to limit drilled pier diameters to 9
feet. Second, each column foundation was custom designed for the
rock quality at that location. The geotechnical engineer conducted
Combined Tower Column/Drilled Pier.
additional borings and rock cores at each column, thus resulting in each

STRUCTURE magazine 26 June 2011


Transfer Beam Construction.
the combined tower column/drilled pier being un-braced for 45 feet.
The tower construction schedule was reviewed to determine how much
load would be on these columns when this condition occurred, and
then the combined tower column/drilled pier assembly was checked
to ensure that there would not be a stability problem associated with
this temporary un-braced condition.
Coordinating Transfer Construction
A transfer level was designed to transfer the column loads from the
above residential tower to the office tower columns below, as well as
provide needed mechanical space. The transfer level was also utilized
as an outrigger level where the shear walls at the core could engage
the perimeter columns, thus engaging the entire building width to
resist lateral loads. The outriggers aided in the reduction of differential
shortening by providing a means of redistributing loads from the
highly stressed columns to the lower stressed core.
Due to the magnitude of the applied loads and the scale of the
outrigger elements, the design of the transfer floor was unique and
extremely challenging; however, the real challenge came during the
construction phase of the floor. The shoring system required to sup-
port the casting of 14-foot deep beams presented the first obstacle.
Typical shoring sequencing uses the live load capacity of three to
four levels below to support the weight of the floor that is being cast,
thus resulting in one forming floor and two to three re-shore floors.
Due to the massive weight associated with the transfer floor casting,
initial formwork design estimated 10 floors of re-shoring. This was a
significant expense and schedule concern. The solution was to design
the three floors below the transfer floor to carry the full weight of the
transfer floor construction.
The large wall-beams that comprise the transfer floor have heavy
layers of reinforcing and post-tensioning cables, therefore fitting all
of the rebar and PT in the beams while maintaining room to allow
the concrete to flow through was quite a challenge. The team had
multiple coordination meetings that included all trades involved in
the floor construction. In these meetings, the details of every bar,
stirrup, tendon, and beam opening were worked out in great detail.
Reinforcing splice locations were carefully selected based on a maxi-
mum bar length of 60 feet. Splices were staggered in many cases to
avoid what would have otherwise been a congestion problem. Due
to the large volumes of concrete necessary, it was only possible to
cast short pieces of each transfer beam at a time. Casting sequences
were carefully coordinated to ensure that the final structure would
perform as intended, and to ensure that the floors below would not
STRUCTURE magazine 27
become overstressed due to the heavy pattern loads resulting from the
casting sequences. Self leveling concrete was used in the construction
of the transfer floor to avoid honeycombing and voids. This technol-
ogy allows the mix to be dialed in on how fluid the concrete is at the
time of placement. After three trial mixes, the right balance between
workability and form tightness was found and successfully used for
the casting sequences.
Because transfer girders do not see the majority of the load until
the upper floors have been constructed, it is important that post-
tensioning of these girders be properly staged. If the tendons are
stressed too early, the resulting forces can impose opposite stresses on
the beam that would potentially fail stress and strength limits prior
to the column loads being fully in place. Three stressing stages were
designed to keep the transfer beams within code allowable limits
based on careful examination of the construction sequence and the
expected building loads at each stage.
A two-story penthouse and a steel-framed building crown top off
the tower. The desired geometry of the penthouse and building
crown resulted in another transfer level. This transfer level provided
another opportunity to link the building core to the exterior columns,
to once again engage the entire building width in resisting lateral
loads. There were the same concerns regarding shoring, particularly
since the floors below were flat plate with light live load designs. The
solution this time was to construct the transfer beams in two stages.
The bottom 3 feet of each beam was cast with a complete reinforcing
cage, in addition to having the dowels needed to complete the overall
transfer beam. This sub-beam was then used to support the weight
of casting the remaining 5 feet. This beam staging allowed normal
shoring procedures since the shoring did not have to support the full
weight of the transfer beam.
Conclusion
Completed in 2008, 3344 Peachtree/Sovereign is Atlanta’s most
captivating and tallest mixed-use development. The use of transfer
floors provided an innovative solution to a number of design concerns.
Meticulous coordination also reduced potential problems during
construction and allowed the project to be completed on time and
within budget.▪
Clinton O. Rex, Ph.D., P.E. is a Principal with Stanley D. Lindsey
& Associates (SDL) and was the EOR for the 3344 Peachtree
project. He may be reached at crex@sdlal.com.
Rachel Lancaster, E.I.T. was an integral member of the 3344
Peachtree/Sovereign team.
Project Team
Owner: Regent Partners
Structural Engineer: Stanley D. Lindsey & Associates, Ltd.
Architect: Smallwood, Reynolds, Stewart,
Stewart & Associates, Inc.
Curtain Wall Engineer: Bruce Wall Systems Corporation
Contractor: Hardin Construction Company, LLC
Concrete Supplier: Lafarge, North America
Rebar Supplier: CMC Rebar, Atlanta
Post-Tensioned Tendon Supplier: DSI, Atlanta
June 2011
Intelligent
Structural Design

With RAM™, STAAD® and

Model, Analyze, Design, Document Documentation Center, Bentley
offers proven applications for:
and Deliver…in an Integrated Workflow l Steel/Steel Composite
l Reinforced Concrete
Having all the applications you need for the tasks at hand, along with the ability
l Wood and Wood Products
to easily synchronize your work with the rest of the project information, helps
you get your job done right, fast and profitably. And when the structural project l Foundation Design
workflow can be integrated, the whole team benefits. l Post-Tensioned Design
l Steel Connections
Bentley’s new Passport Subscriptions for structural engineers provide access to l Structural Drawings and Details
the full range of structural software (including upgrades) and training documents
and information that most projects require. These options are available as an … all easily coordinated with the
affordable alternative to traditional licensing. Architect and other team members and
their design applications – such as
Contact us to learn more. AutoCAD, Revit, MicroStation® and more.

www.Bentley.com/Structural
© 2010 Bentley Systems, Incorporated. Bentley, the “B” Bentley logo, MicroStation, RAM, and STAAD are either registered or unregistered trademarks
or service marks of Bentley Systems, Incorporated or one of its direct or indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries. Other brands and product names are
trademarks of their respective owners.
 Icon
Engineering an

The Marina BaySands ®

Integrated Resort

By Patrick McCafferty, P.E., Daniel Brodkin, P.E., David Farnsworth, P.E. and David Scott, P.E.
Figure 1: The 6 million square foot Marina Bay Sands Integrated Resort as seen from across Marina Bay during construction. Courtesy of Darren Soh.

T
he Marina Bay Sands® Integrated Resort is part of a bold
new development initiative within Singapore’s Marina Bay
district. This $5.7 billion resort encompasses 10 million
square feet of mixed-use development and features three
55-story luxury hotel towers housing 2,560 rooms and topped by
the 2.5 acre landscaped rooftop SkyPark®. The resort also boasts an
iconic museum, two steel and glass pavilions within the Bay itself and
accessible by underwater tunnels, a 1.3 million square foot conven-
tion center, two 2,000 seat performance theatres, and over 1 million
square feet of casino, retail, and restaurant space (Figure 1).
This article introduces the structural design of the 55-story Marina
Bay Sands Hotel and SkyPark. A future article will discuss the engi-
neering design of the other structures of the complex.
challenge because of the form’s asymmetry and because the curved
eastern legs cause each tower to lean against the opposing vertical legs
(Figure 2). As a result, the primary lateral force demands imposed on
the building are governed by the effects of gravity rather than either
wind or seismic effects.
Structural Flare
Reinforced concrete shear walls, varying in thickness from 28 inches
at their base to 20 inches at higher floor levels, are located on 33-foot
centers within each of the three towers. The shear walls serve as the
primary vertical and transverse structural system of all three build-
ings. Additional concrete core walls located within both legs of each

Collaboration
Building upon a strong and established relationship of collaborative
design, Moshe Safdie invited the Boston office of Arup to join their
multi-disciplinary team assembled to compete for the design of this
new resort. The competition ran from January through March of
2006, and the Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA)
announced the winning design in June of 2006.
In order to meet a 2010 completion date, substructure and geotechni-
cal work went to bid just three months after the project was awarded.
Conceptual and Schematic designs were developed in Boston with
Safdie Architects. The Boston-based Arup team grew quickly as the
design concepts developed, ultimately mobilizing key staff from Arup
offices around the world including New York, San Francisco, Los
Angeles, Hong Kong, Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, and Singapore.
This global team, including Aedas in Hong Kong and the owner in
Las Vegas and Macau, put the latest three-dimensional documenta-
tion and telecommunication tools to immediate and effective use in
order to coordinate efforts across multiple continents simultaneously.

Hotel Towers
Construction of the 55-story hotel towers was on the critical path.
As such, the design of these one-of-a-kind buildings became an
early focus for the AE team. The base of the towers flare to create a
common, contiguous tapered lobby atrium running the length of Figure 2: The hotel’s south tower rises majestically over the contiguous lobby
all three towers. The taper of the base created a significant technical below. Courtesy of Timothy Hursley.

STRUCTURE magazine 29 June 2011

Right: Figure 4: Temporary shoring of the hotel towers during
construction minimized the amount of locked-in stress accumulated
within the opposing legs of each building. Courtesy of Arup.

Below: Figure 3: Lateral stability system of the hotel towers.

Courtesy of Patrick S. McCafferty.

building restrain the hotel in the longitudinal direction and help
prevent out-of-plane buckling of the relatively narrow shear walls
within both legs of the towers. Indeed, the requirement for such
restraint was established very early in the design following rigorous
buckling analyses of both legs. Post-tensioned 8-inch flat slabs span
directly between the shear walls. This arrangement maximizes struc-
tural efficiency and creates a simple floor slab solution that can be
built rapidly. The flat slab scheme also provides flexibility in the hotel
room layout, accommodates a relatively tight 9-foot 10-inch typical
floor-to-floor height, and accommodates flexibility of building services
distribution and coordination throughout each floor.
Story-height steel trusses located within the Level 23 mechanical
floors connect the legs of the tower and resist the large shear forces
that occur where these meet above the central atrium. At ground floor

ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

STRUCTURE magazine 30 June 2011

Figure 5: The SkyPark appears to float high above the hotel towers. With a cantilever of 218 feet, the roof deck is the longest habitable cantilevered observation
deck in the world. Courtesy of Arup.
level, the base slab is post-tensioned to resist the horizontal thrusts
generated by the inclined legs (Figure 3).
Designing for Construction
Because of the extreme flare of the legs of the towers, the opposing
shear walls tend to flex and drift laterally during construction. It was
therefore crucial that the design carefully consider the construction
sequence; a simple in-place structural analysis would be inappropriate.
To this end, Arup conducted a series of construction stage analyses
of various erection scenarios early in the design process in order
to quantify the amount of displacement and locked-in stress that
would accumulate within each tower under each scenario. The study
concluded that substantial temporary works would be necessary to
properly limit both effects, but that some degree of locked-in stress
could not be avoided. During the Tender Process, the engineering
team worked closely with the hotel contractors to devise a scheme
that utilized temporary shoring to brace the inclined shear walls
against the vertical walls to good effect (Figure 4). Additional studies
demonstrated that by introducing prestress within both the vertical
and inclined shear walls, these movements and resulting stresses could
be further reduced. A final construction stage analysis of the chosen
method of erection was then conducted to serve as a benchmark for
construction. As the towers were erected, a real-time monitoring
system was implemented to compare the actual stress levels against
this benchmark, enabling back-analysis and design modification of
the constructed tower in the event that the actual measurements
deviated from the targets.
STRUCTURE magazine
Measurements of the walls included the:
• angular rotation at the top of the tower
• maximum displacement of elevation in all three axes
• differential movement between vertical and inclined walls
• differential movement between adjacent wall bays
• differential movement among all three towers (which affects
the support provided to the SkyPark)
In addition, immediate displacements arising from self-weight effects
were offset via pre-camber during construction. However, because of
their asymmetry, further complicated by concrete creep and shrink-
age effects, the towers are expected to continue to deform laterally
until these movements converge after approximately 30 years. These
predicted long-term displacements have been accounted for in the
design and specification of the vertical transportation systems, core
layouts, building services, and building finishes and façade details.
SkyPark
At 1,115 feet long, 131 feet wide, and cantilevering 213 feet at an
elevation of over 650 feet above grade, the hotel rooftop SkyPark is
the world’s longest habitable cantilevered observation deck and has
become a symbolic icon for Singapore in the process (Figure 5). This
feature component boasts 2.5 acres of landscaped gardens comprising
250 trees up to 26 feet in height and over 650 plants, necessitating in
excess of 81,000 cubic feet of soil; signature restaurants; a 495-foot
long infinity edge swimming pool containing over 375,000 gallons
of water, and an observation platform offering unrivalled 360 degree
views of the Bay and surrounding city (Figure 6, page 33). To be
31 June 2011
 successful, the design had to reconcile several competing demands: All such schemes were assessed for both their weight and ease of con-
the aesthetic goal of creating an elegant park high above the towers, struction. The design team, in conjunction with the fabricators and
the minimum weight and efficiency demands required to limit the erectors, converged upon a system of post-tensioned segmental steel
adverse effects on the towers below, and the constructability require- box girders 33 feet deep by 12 feet wide with 1⅜-inch sidewalls and
ments necessary to enable pre-assembly and rapid construction on site. 2⅜-inch flanges as the primary structural system for the cantilevering
segment, and a system of primary steel bridge trusses for those seg-
ments spanning between the hotel towers. The bridges directly atop
Structural Optimization Studies each tower are supported on raking steel “V” struts extending from
A number of framing options were considered for the SkyPark early in the hotel roof directly over the concrete shear walls. The segments
the design process. These included various truss, beam, steel diagrid, between each tower span as simply-supported trusses onto the ends
and segmented hollow concrete bridge alternatives, among others. of the adjoining segments.
The relative displacements of all three
towers vary dramatically, owing to their

DON’T LET PROGRESS PASS YOU BY

subtle geometric differences. Movement
joints located between each tower accom-
modate such differential movements arising
Leading the way in providing simple, cost-effective solutions from thermal expansion, wind-induced
that provide the highest value for the building owner. movements, and other time-dependent
lateral movements generated from creep
Are you still using traditional welding methods and shrinkage arising from the asymmetry
and attachment patterns? If so, you are leaving of the towers. Careful detailing through
money on the table for the building owner. the infinity edge pool accommodates these
joints and gives the impression of a clean
2010 monolithic roof deck running continu-
36/7/4 roof deck ously across the towers.
attachment Another important consideration in
pattern reducing the design of the SkyPark cantilever was
attachment cost its response to wind-induced vibrations,
and vibrations arising from rhythmic
without sacrificing
human activity such as dancing and
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

performance.
running. The introduction of a 5-ton
2006 Power actuated
fasteners to support framing tuned mass damper within the design
replaces arc spot welds in of the cantilever served to mitigate these
combination with the DeltaGrip®
high shear mechanically
effects. Subsequent dynamic testing of
2003 DeltaGrip ®

mechanical clinch
connections replacing
costly top seam
welding of steel deck.
1930’s Stick welding with heavy-coated
electrodes found widespread use.
1836 Edmund Davy of
England is credited with the
discovery of acetylene.
During the Middle Ages many
items of iron were produced which
were welded by hammering.
In the Bronze Age small
boxes were made by pressure
welding lap joints together.
For more information about lowering installation costs, visit
www.36-7-4.com today, or call ASC Steel Deck at 800-726-2727
fastened system. the completed SkyPark has verified the
performance of this system.
2000 AD
Construction Sequence
The SkyPark was prefabricated off-site in
14 primary segments. The bridging sec-
tions extending between adjacent towers
1920’s Stud welding
each consist of three 400-ton bridge
was developed at the trusses that were pre-assembled at grade.
New York Navy Yard.
These were then strand jacked into place
over a span of 16 hours. The final cantile-
1900 AD 1890 C.L. Coffin of vering portion was likewise prefabricated
Detroit was awarded the
first U.S. patent for an arc
in segments at grade to ensure proper
welding process using a fit-up. The entire assembly was then disas-
metal electrode.
sembled and each segment was hoisted in
1800 AD turn via strand jacks cantilevering from a
moveable gantry attached from secondary
500–1500 AD
beams at roof level, themselves spanning
between the main box girders of the
previously installed segment.
3800–3000 BC
In total, over 7,000 tons of SkyPark
steelwork was erected in just 13 weeks.

STRUCTURE magazine 32 June 2011

 Figure 6: The SkyPark’s infinity edge pool offers commanding views of
Marina Bay and Singapore’s central business district beyond. Courtesy of
Timothy Hursley.

Conclusion
The overall form of the Marina Bay Sands Hotel was driven by
the architectural requirement for a continuous atrium running the
length of all three towers. The resulting geometric flare was resolved
Figure 7: The iconic Marina Bay Sands Integrated Resort has become a shining
structurally via prestressed concrete base slabs and multi-story shear beacon for Singapore. Courtesy of Darren Soh.
trusses located between opposing building halves through the mid-
level mechanical rooms. The hotel’s asymmetry demanded detailed
construction sequence analyses to assess the towers’ continual deflec-
tion during erection. Moreover, the unique form of each tower
Project Team
resulted in differential movements under imposed load, which
Structural, Civil, Geotechnical, Façade, Fire, Traffic, Acoustic and
further complicated the engineering design of the rooftop SkyPark
Audio Visual, Security and Risk Engineering, and 3D Building
and its support. Each of these challenges was addressed and resolved
Modeling: Arup
through close collaboration among the design, construction, and
Owner: Las Vegas Sands Corporation
client teams (Figure 7).▪
Design Architect: Safdie Architects
Executive Architect: Aedas Ltd. Pte.
Patrick S. McCafferty, P.E. (Patrick.McCafferty@arup.com) is
MEP Engineers (Design): R.G. Vanderweil, LLP
the Structural Engineering Practice Leader for Arup in Boston and
MEP Engineers (Production): Parsons Brinckerhoff
served as Arup’s US-based Project Manager for the Marina Bay
Landscape Architect (Design): Peter Walker & Partners
Sands Integrated Resort.
Landscape Architect (Production): Peridian International, Inc.
Daniel Brodkin, P.E. (Daniel.Brodkin@arup.com) is a Principal Contractors: Bachy Soletanche (Substructure, Foundations)
for Arup. David Farnsworth, P.E. (David.Farnsworth@arup.com) JFE Engineering Corporation (SkyPark)
is an Associate Principal for Arup. David Scott, P.E. Ssangyong Engineering & Construction (Hotel)
(David.Scott@arup.com) is a Senior Principal for Arup. VSL Heavy Lifting (SkyPark)
Yongnam Holdings (Museum, SkyPark)

STRUCTURE magazine 33 June 2011

Put infrastructure spending
on a solid foundation.
Monotube® Piles. Solid Economics
In the infrastructure space across America,
thousands of projects are on the books and
simply awaiting funding to get underway.
Coincidentally, polls show we Americans are
strongly in favor of major investment in our aging
infrastructure. However, concurrent with this
favorable opinion is a strong demand for
accountability and measurable efficiencies in how
our tax dollars are going to be spent. We as
corporate citizens, whether manufacturer,
designer, engineer or contractor, have a serious
interest in this.
Monotube tapered steel foundation piles have
consistently delivered capital-saving measurability
for more than 80 years.
P.O. Box 7339 • Canton, OH 44705-0339 / Ph. 330.454.6111 • Fax 330.454.1572
Executive Office: 5002 Second Avenue • Brooklyn, NY 11232
Email: monotube@neo.rr.com / www.monotube.com.
Using conventional equipment, a Monotube
requires a shorter driven length to achieve
design load capacity, fewer man-hours and less
energy to install than competing products. We
have numerable test site data proving
Monotube pile’s superior performance and it’s
yours free for the asking.
America is about to embark on a historic
expenditure of taxpayer dollars. We at
Monotube Pile Corporation know we can
help you keep costs in check. Give us a call
today because, as always, we’re ready to
deliver solid economics.
Request our
Free Catalog
Seismic Projects Picking Up
By Larry Kahaner
Offerings Abound

W
ith the recent earthquake and resulting tsunami in and, at the same time, when the material is applied, the overall profile
Japan, building owners and engineers are taking a of the structural member is typically only increased one-quarter to
fresh focus on seismic ground mitigation, retrofit- one-half an inch,” says Carr. (See ad on page 40.)
ting and repair. Ian Aiken, a Principal with SIE, Inc. (www.unbondedbrace.com),
Mo Ehsani, President of QuakeWrap Inc. (www.quakewrap.com) in Emeryville, California, says that his company has seen an upswing
in Tucson, Arizona, has developed a new Fiber Reinforced Polymer in the number of buckling restrained brace (BRB) construction proj-
(FRP) called PileMedic (www.PileMedic.com) that offers a simple, ects bidding. “These projects are spread across the entire U.S. and
yet strong and durable, solution for repair of deteriorated piles and not only concentrated in the western states. We believe that this is
columns in buildings, bridges, water and wastewater facilities, indus-
trial plants, and underwater piles. “The fiber is mixed with resin and
run through a press,” says Ehsani. “This produces a very thin sheet,
pre-cured and stiff. It can stand on its own. You can cut a section of
this laminate and wrap it around a column without necessarily bond-
ing to, or touching, the column. The space in between can be filled
with grout or epoxy. If you apply it with pressure, it will fill cracks
and holes. The column doesn’t have to be smooth.”
So far the company has done about 50 columns on St. Louis bridges
and other structures. Ehsani adds: “It’s perfect for disaster relief, say,

ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

after an earthquake, because it can shore up damaged columns in a
few hours.”
A company that offers a unique product for seismic protection is
Fibrwrap Construction, Inc. (www.fibrwrapconstruction.com)
of Ontario, California. “We are a specialized contractor that sup-
plies and installs fiber reinforced polymer products, or Fiber Wrap,
manufactured by the Fyfe Company,” says CEO Heath Carr. “We
also perform other structural repair applications, including concrete
repair, epoxy crack injection, and specialty coatings.”
“When the Fiber Wrap is applied to columns, for instance, for seismic
strengthening,” says Carr, “it reinforces the structure so that during
an earthquake, catastrophic events do not occur, such as building col-
lapse.” The company is in the process of completing structural upgrades
to three parking structures located in Santa Barbara, California. “The
key benefit of the Tyfo Fibrwrap, in this case, is that the city is able to
add important structural capacity without changing the look of the
downtown buildings which are part of the city’s landscape. With the
installation of Fiber Wrap, you can add structural value to columns,
beams, walls, and even pipelines, with a lightweight, low profile
advanced composite material. The foundation is not impacted, even
though you’re adding significantly to the robustness of the structure;

STRUCTURE magazine 35 June 2011

 evidence of a slowly improving economy, but with significant growth
not expected for another 12-16 months.”
He adds: “The Unbonded Brace is the original, and most widely
used, buckling-restrained brace in the world, with more than 20
years of research and development behind it.” According to Aiken,
the Unbonded Brace has been used in nearly 100 projects in the
U.S. and more than 700 projects worldwide. Domestic applica-
tions include the new 620,000 square-foot, 13-story Kaiser Oakland
Hospital, which has recently completed steel erection. He said it is
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
STRUCTURE magazine 36
the largest Seismic Zone 4 BRB project in the U.S., using more than
600 Unbonded Braces.
“Unbonded Braces are being used by structural engineers in an ever-
increasing number of applications,” Aiken says. “Since the engineer
knows very accurately at what load the brace will yield and what the
brace maximum load is, they are able to efficiently size the other
structural members, from the brace connections themselves down
to the foundations. It has been shown through numerous studies
that significant cost-savings are possible with BRBs over other lateral
load-resisting systems.”
Even though BRBs are now well-estab-
lished, it is often the case that the check/
review parties are unfamiliar with the
details of the technology. Therefore, being
able to provide support to the structural
engineer, to ensure the fullest understand-
ing by all parties, can be a significant
contribution to smooth project outcome.”
Also touting the benefits of BRBs is
Mike Linford, Project Development, for
West Jordan, Utah-based Corebrace, LLC
(www.corebrace.com). The company
began research and development of their
BRBs in February of 2001. In November
of 2004, Corebrace tested their largest
BRBs ever (1100 kips) at the University
of California, San Diego. This testing
was done to obtain California’s Office of
Statewide Health Planning (OSHPD)
approval to supply Corebrace BRBs for
hospital projects. Again, this testing was
exceedingly successful, and Corebrace has
now been approved for hospital projects,
according to company officials. “We make
the best BRB Frames on the market. It’s
a very economical solution for most steel
structures, particularly if you’re over 3 or
4 stories high,” says Linford.
He says that the company fabricates
its own braces in the United States and
offers four different connection types. “The
bottom line is that BRBs can usually save
the owner money,” says Linford. (See ad
on page 38.)
Konrad Eriksen, President of Dynamic
Isolation Systems, Inc. (www.dis-inc.com),
says: “Our main business is base isola-
tion, and we have recently expanded our
product line with Viscous Wall Dampers
that benefit taller buildings and Low Mass
Isolation products that protect equipment
and light structures. We have completed
over 350 projects in 15 countries.”
He notes that McCarran, Nevada-based
DIS’s main market is Japan, and the pre-
dominant structures are new hospitals.
“We have also isolated condominiums,
continued on page 38
June 2011
 DIS-thirdsq-4c-June11.pdf 1 5/4/2011 1:15:25 PM

office buildings, and communications

and manufacturing facilities there. Our
Viscous Wall Dampers were developed and
first used in Japan by our partner there. In
New Zealand, we have recently isolated a
hospital, a power station, and a boiler at a
pulp mill. In the U.S., we have a mixture
of hospitals, bridges, and infrastructure,
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

such as wharves. We are also seeing strong

interest in the nuclear market.”
The company’s Viscous Wall Damper
(VWD) is being used in a new hospital
in San Francisco, located about seven miles
from the San Andreas Fault. “The geometry
of the VWD allows for more architectural
freedom, as it can be placed inside walls
and does not intrude into the occupied
space as diagonal braces and hydrau-
lic dampers do. The 15 percent system
damping reduced the design forces by 25
percent. From a maintenance viewpoint,
it has no seals and does not operate under
pressure, ensuring reliability throughout
the life of the structure,” says Eriksen.
Born from the aftermath of California’s
Northridge earthquake in 1994, Sideplate
(www.sideplate.com) offers a suite of
high-performance steel frame connec-
tion technologies that have successfully
been tested to provide protection against
blasts, progressive collapse, and earth-
quakes, according to company officials.

CoreBrace Advantages “Performance is key, but engineers must

live in the real world, and any solution
must be economical,” says Jesse Karns, Vice
„ Only domestic Buckling Restrained Brace Manufacturer President of Research and Development
that designs and fabricates in its own facility—allowing full
at the Laguna Hills, California company.
QA/QC and scheduling control
“Sideplate has an advantage in that its per-
„ Real-Time Engineering Design Assistance formance also makes it economical. By
„ CoreBrace BRB testing has been performed and verified by forcing hinge to occur out in the beam,
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

independent national and international laboratories with we get a stronger system that is able to
results that significantly exceed the requirements of AISC 341 resist drifts better and, in doing so, we are
„ Design integration with RAM and REVIT able to come up with frame sizes that are
„ Most connection options of any BRB supplier smaller and still maintain drift control in
earthquakes.” Karns adds: “As engineers
look more and more at performance-based
design, our products look better because
performance is something that Sideplate
excels at.” (See ad on page 37.)
Engineers also are looking to ground
improvement for increased seismic pro-
tection, especially in geographic areas
that were not always considered seismi-
cally active. “The biggest change in areas
of seismic risk doesn’t seem to be in
California anymore, where design teams
have been addressing it for many years,”
www.corebrace.com says Brendan FitzPatrick, Director of
5789 West Wells Park Road North America for Geopier Foundation
West Jordan, UT 84081 Company, in Mooresville, North Carolina
Phone 801.280.0701 Fax 801.280.3231
continued on page 40

STRUCTURE magazine 38 June 2011

 GEOPIER Ground Improvement
®

Grouted Displacement IMPACT PIERS

®

GEOPIER PROVIDES DESIGN-BUILD GROUND IMPROVEMENT SOLUTIONS FOR ALL SOIL TYPES
®

• soft compressible soil • liquefaction mitigation • unstable soils below groundwater • uplift/lateral loads • tanks • slope
stabilization • replace costly deep foundations • heavy loads • walls & embankments • power plants & towers • variable fill

866-265-4969
www.geopier.com

Offices coast-to-coast in the U.S. Internationally in Canada, Latin America, Europe and Asia
“Engineers are dealing with more seismic challenges in places
... where seismic risks and design levels have become a
bigger concern than, say, twenty years ago.”
(www.geopier.com). “Engineers are dealing with more seismic chal-
lenges in places like Tennessee, Illinois, and Kentucky, where seismic
risks and design levels have become a bigger concern than, say, twenty
years ago.”
FitzPatrick notes: “Because of changes in building codes over the last
ten years or so, we’re seeing a need for increased bearing pressures and
higher uplift loads on structures, as well as greater liquefaction risks.
We’ve provided solutions for increased bearing pressures and uplift
load resistance, as well as liquefaction, for years using our replace-
ment (Geopier) system. We’re now doing more with our displacement
(Impact) system to provide the same benefits and reduce the risk of
liquefaction to greater depths.”
Also working in the ground improvement area is St. Louis-based
Subsurface Constructors (www.subsurfaceconstructors.com). The
company has been engaged in a long-term seismic retrofit project on a
bridge in downtown St. Louis. “We have hundreds of micropiles and
drill shafts,” says Lyle Simonton, Director of Business Development.
“It’s a double-decker bridge on the Missouri side of the Mississippi
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
Fyfe Ad-Oct 2010.indd 1
STRUCTURE magazine
River and we’ve been working on it since the late 1990s. We’ll be
done within two years.”
The company is becoming increasingly busy with ground improve-
ment services. “We’re starting to see more private work, not full force
yet, but a lot more activity than a year or two ago,” says Simonton.
Another soil mitigation technique involves earthquake drains. During
an earthquake, loose, sandy soils can liquefy, causing damage to
structures supported by the soil. By providing drains, pore pres-
sures can be dissipated before they reach dangerous levels. Hayward
Baker, Inc. (www.haywardbaker.com), headquartered in Odenton,
Maryland, has acquired the rights to patented earthquake drains with
the recent purchase of Nilex Construction (now HB Wick Drains).
These drainage elements are installed vertically into the ground on a
grid pattern, according to Director Jim Hussin.
“In applications where structures are less sensitive to settlement, or
where the soils are only marginally liquefiable, earthquake drains alone
can be effective,” says Hussin. “For more sensitive structures, Hayward
continued on page 42
12/1/10 10:55 AM
40 June 2011
 Baker can now offer more economical treat-
ment programs which combine earthquake
drains with traditional densification tech-
niques, such as vibro-densification with large
down hole vibrators, or compaction grouting.
A third manner in which liquefaction can be
mitigated is by reinforcing the soils with stiff
elements that carry the seismic shear stresses.”
Inclement weather and slow funding has
hampered projects, according to Steve
Holdsworth, Vice President of Operations
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
& Technical Manager at Barsplice Products,
Inc. (www.barsplice.com), in Dayton, Ohio.
He says his customers report that there are
a lot of projects – both private and federally
funded – that should have started by now.
“Some of these projects have been delayed due
to issues associated with funding and/or rising
material costs. A number of projects have been
re-bid several times already. Bad weather has
also been a factor in delaying jobs.”
Barsplice provides its customers with posi-
tive means of connecting reinforcing bars to
create structural continuity. “Unlike rebar lap
splices, which depend upon the presence of
surrounding concrete to transfer load from
one piece of bar to the next, the installed
strength of our mechanical splice devices is
independent of the concrete.” He adds: “For
seismic design, I think that structural engi-
neers should know that they have some great
ADVERTISING OPPORTUNITIES
STRUCTURE® magazine is planning several additional
SPECIAL ADVERTORIALSin 2011.
To discuss advertising opportunities, please contact
our ad sales representatives:
CHUCK MINOR
Phone: 847-854-1666
Sales@STRUCTUREmag.org
STRUCTURE magazine 42 June 2011
choices of Type 2 mechanical splice devices
which, by definition, are designed to develop
the specified tensile strength of the reinforc-
ing bar. Under severe overload conditions,
Type 2 mechanical splices are designed to
hold the reinforcing bars together through
the yield point of the bars, thereby permitting
the adjoining bars to plastically deform and
absorb seismic energy.”
Holdsworth sees mechanical splicing sys-
tems as part on an evolutionary process,
driven by changing code requirements and
innovations. “Our business was founded on
the use of cold-swaged BarGrip couplers,
which are installed in the field by hydraulic
presses. For many years, the BarGrip family
of couplers has provided great opportunities,
when compared to the lapping of bars. For
example, by eliminating the lap in columns,
designers can reduce column sizes and create
more floor space in office buildings and apart-
ments. Recently, the Zap Screwlok system
was invented to overcome the problem you
can have when reinforced concrete designs
become congested and it can sometimes be
tricky to maneuver a swaging press into place.
The Zap Screwlok splicing system derives
its strength from screws that are tightened
through a coupler body onto the rebar. The
heads of the screws twist-off at a prescribed
torque value.”▪
DICK RAILTON
Phone: 951-587-2982
InSIghtS new trends, new techniques and current industry issues
Weathering Steel for Bridges
Corrosion Protection without Coating
By Brian Kozy, Ph.D., P.E. & Lou Triandafilou, P.E.
W
eathering steels are high
strength, low alloy steels that
can provide corrosion pro-
tection without additional
coating. Increase in alloying elements, primar-
ily copper, provides an arresting mechanism
to atmospheric corrosion in the material itself.
This resistance is due to the fact that this steel
will develop a durable, tightly adherent pro-
tective surface patina comprised of corrosion
by-products that act as a skin to protect the
steel substrate. Section loss on the order of
100 mils (0.01 inches) may be expected before
the patina sets up, but this is negligible to the
structural performance.
The material was developed in the 1930s for
use in coal hopper train cars to resist the cor-
rosive effects of the sulfur in coal and exposure
to long periods of rain. Experience at the time
found that conventional steel was corroding
in relatively short periods of time. What sets
the material apart from conventional steel is
in the chemistry. Weathering steel will have
a minimum copper content of at least 0.20
percent, whereas conventional carbon steels
have a copper content of less than .02 percent.
The new generation of high performance steel
(HPS) also provides weathering performance,
with a slightly greater resistance to atmo-
spheric corrosion than its predecessors.
When properly applied, the use of weath-
ering steel has provided cost effective, low
maintenance bridges. The material was first
utilized on a bridge project in Morristown,
NJ for the NJ Turnpike in 1964. It has been
shown that several costs can be avoided by
NOT painting. The time involved to shop
apply some of the multi-coat systems can be
considerable. In today’s market place, where
speed of construction is becoming so impor-
tant, the curing time between coats is ‘lost’
time. Material sitting on the shop floor curing
takes space that could otherwise be utilized
to fabricate the next girder, which instead
has to wait.
Although weathering grade steel mate-
rial costs approximately 3-4 cents more per
pound than comparable carbon steel, these
STRUCTURE magazine
costs are more than offset by lower fabrication
costs, elimination of a shop coat of paint,
and at least one cycle of field repainting in
most cases. This translates into lower main-
tenance and life cycle costs, which reduces
impact to the traveling public. The owner
also gains a bridge with a natural appear-
ance that blends with the environment and
is highly sustainable. With these advantages
in mind, approximately 40-45% of all steel
bridges are being built with some form of
weathering steel.
Along with the benefits, there are cau-
tions which bridge owners need to consider
when deciding to use uncoated weather-
ing steel. Guidance with regard to proper
environment, location, design details and
maintenance is summarized in the Federal
Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Technical
Advisory 5140.22, dated October 3, 1989.
Bridge owners have learned through experi-
ence that there are some site conditions not
appropriate for weathering steel. These include
areas subject to salt water spray or salt laden
fog, areas of prolonged wetness where the
steel is not allowed to dry, and industrial areas
(particularly where sulfur exists). These areas
can be evaluated in more depth by ASTM
Test G92 Characterization of Atmospheric Test
Sites, Wet Candle Method, and ASTM Test
G84 Time of Wetness Determination, or by
consulting a corrosion specialist.
Grade separations with low clearances and
tunnel- like conditions may permit road
spray, which is highly salt-contaminated, to
accumulate on the superstructure. Low-level
crossings over water (8 feet over moving and
10 feet over stagnant) may also create a cor-
rosive atmosphere.
Proper drainage control details are designed
to protect the steel girders from deck runoff.
These include minimizing the use of deck
expansion joints but use of drainage troughs
where large movement joints are required;
minimizing the use of scuppers; painting
girder ends (5 to 10 feet); use of drip bars;
eliminating debris traps; and, covering open-
ings in boxes.
44 June 2011
Guidance is also provided by FHWA to
implement maintenance procedures to detect
and minimize advanced corrosion. Owners
have implemented such practices as control-
ling roadway drainage; regularly removing
debris that traps moisture; and, regularly
removing vegetation which prevents natural
drying of the steel.
FHWA is making an effort to develop a
deeper understanding of weathering steel
bridge performance and to provide more
detailed guidance on proper application.
Research is underway involving 3D numerical
simulations of truck passage events at bridges
using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)
to quantify the amount of salt spray that is
deposited on the girders and how this might
be influenced by various geometric param-
eters. Also, FHWA has plans to perform a
national study of weathering steel bridge
performance in various micro and macro envi-
ronments. These efforts will provide data for
improving the guidance by better definition
of “tunnel like conditions” and/or “coastal
environments” to name a few.
In conclusion, uncoated weathering steel
bridges have generally performed well when
they have been designed and maintained in
accordance with the guidance outlined above.
Weathering steel can offer improved economy
and life-cycle cost and aesthetics, and should
be considered whenever possible.▪
Brian Kozy, Ph.D., P.E. is a Senior Bridge
Engineer (Steel Specialist) for FHWA in
Washington, D.C. Dr. Kozy leads the
national Steel Bridge Program. He can
be reached at brian.kozy@dot.gov.
Louis N. Triandafilou, P.E. is the Team
Leader for the Bridge and Foundation
Engineering Team, Office of Infrastructure
Research & Development, FHWA Turner
Fairbank Highway Research Center in
McLean, VA. This Team is responsible
for carrying out research on innovative
applications of structural concrete,
structural steel and geotechnologies.
 GRADE 97ksi ULTRA HIGH STRENGTH

BUILDING RENDERING COPYRIGHT SILVERSTEIN PROPERTIES

CONCRETE REINFORCEMENT SYSTEM

THE USE OF SAS GRADE 97 IN HIGH RISE

CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION, SUCH AS

WORLD TRADE CENTER TOWER 3

TOWERS 2, 3, & 4 TOWER 4

PROVIDES A BETTER SOLUTION FOR
ENGINEERS, CONTRACTORS & DEVELOPERS.

TOWER 2

SAS
The SAS Threaded Bar System has been extensively used in the rebuilding effort of the World Trade
Center Towers. From foundation and geotechnical applications to concrete reinforcement of ongoing
superstructure operations, SAS has provided solutions to better engineering and construction.
STRESSTEEL

Contact SAS today to find out how we may help your next high rise project. 100 NEW DUTCH LANE
FAIRFIELD, NJ 07004
P: 973 . 244 . 5995
WWW.STRESSTEEL.COM F: 973 . 244 . 0544
Education issuEs
Resolution of Deficiencies in Engineering Education
By Kevin Dong, P.E., S.E.
I
n 2002, practitioners and educators pre-
pared a curriculum that would benefit
practicing structural engineers and stu-
dents desiring to practice. Unfortunately,
there remains today a lack of uniformity in
the application of this curriculum in schools
of higher education. The curriculum can be
viewed at STRUCTURE magazine’s web-
site (www.STRUCTUREmag.org) on the
Education pages. There are a large number of
schools under pressure to graduate students
without exposing them to all of the core build-
ing materials – structural steel, reinforced
concrete, timber and masonry. This represents
a major omission in which a well-rounded
engineer should be familiar with to be attractive
to a wider employment spectrum.
Often, graduates do not fully realize the
deficiency in their education until the
employment interview. The long process
of assisting schools and stakeholders in the
quest for appropriate courses continues. In the
meantime, the Basic Education Committee
of NCSEA has prepared a curriculum for
four of the core courses called “Resolution
of Deficiencies.” The intent is to provide a
topic-driven curriculum for self-education.
Somewhere along the education path, most
students heard an instructor say something
like this: “School will not teach you every-
thing, but it will teach you how to find it.”
This article is the first in a three-part series
that will present one instructor’s idea for the
minimum course content that structural
engineers should have under their belts. In a
complementary effort, The Citadel Professor
Timothy Mays is preparing a text for both
classroom instruction and self-teaching.
The first in the series is STRUCTURAL
STEEL.
Steel Design Course Content
• Gravity-load-resisting systems
° Tension elements
• Tension on gross area versus net area
° Column design
• Buckling about minor or major axis
• Unbraced length
° Beam design
• Limit states
• Lateral-torsional buckling and
unbraced length
• Shear design
• Deflection and serviceability limits
STRUCTURE magazine
core requirements and lifelong learning for structural engineers
° Beam-column elements
• Combined stresses
• Second-order effects and simplified
methods per AISC Chapter B
° Basic connection principles
• Net shear, block shear, bolt types,
bolt capacities in shear and tension,
weld types and cost, weld capacities
• Lateral-load-resisting systems
° Failure mechanisms and required
detailing for special concentric braced
frames (SCBF) and special moment
frames (SMF)
° SCBF
• Statics and basic member sizing
• Unbalanced load condition
• Amplified loads per ASCE 7
• Computer modeling to “match”
proposed detailing
° SMF
• Portal method and assumptions
inherent with this approximate
method.
• Rotational restraint at foundation/
base level
• Strong column–weak beam concept
• Reduced Beam Section design
philosophy, methodology, and history
• Designing for drift versus strength
• Construction Documentation
° General notes
• Relation to project specifications
• Content and purpose of general
note sheets
° Framing plans and “industry
standards” for notation
• Line weights, dimensioning,
text work
• Information required to build; such
as openings, dimensioning, and
miscellaneous metal pieces
° Frame elevations
• Moment frames – detail references
and considerations for splice
locations, doubler plates, base
plates, and reduced beam sections
° Detailing
• Load path and detailing for typical
gravity connections: beam to beam,
beam to column
• Load path and detailing for moment
connections: beam to column web,
beam to column flange
46 June 2011
• Relationship of detailing to construct-
ability, construction sequencing, and
construction tolerances
• The bread and butter of the
industry, but again, academia does
not adequately cover this topic
and this is integral to design and
ultimately building performance
• Elective Topics – not necessary to
achieve the goal of lifelong learning,
but helpful to integrate into practice
° Composite steel design
° Eccentrically braced frame design
and detailing
° Buckling restrained braced frame
design and detailing
° High-rise construction – systems
and behavior
° Beams with holes – unreinforced
and reinforced
° Base plate and anchor bolt design
considering prying action
° Detailing – preferred slab
depression locations and metal
deck support, beam to hollow steel
section connections, and moment
connections with different top of
steel elevations
Do experienced practitioners view the
approach of creating partial curriculum pro-
grams – in particular, the steel design example
presented – as a way to bridge educational
deficiencies for graduates without the core
program? Your comments are needed.
If this is a valid option, then topics, teach-
ing modules, and learning objectives will be
needed for most of the nine courses of the full
curriculum of Basic Education for Structural
Engineers. University of Massachusetts
Professor Scott Civjan, under sponsorship
of AISC, has prepared a teaching module
for structural steel, which can be accessed
at www.aisc.org/content.aspx?id=24858.
Professor Civjan (civjan@ecs.umass.edu)
would enjoy receiving your comments, as well.▪
Kevin Dong, P.E., S.E. is a professor in the
Architectural Engineering Department at
California Polytechnic State University and
a member of the NCSEA Basic Education
Committee. He may be contacted at
kdong@calpoly.edu.
 IN BUILDING HOPE
For over 120 years, Wheeling Corrugating has been a
worldwide leader and trusted partner in supplying steel
decking, accessories, and project management services to
this nation’s most prestigious structures. The customer’s
strict requirements are what drive our business and separate
us from the production-driven pack. Our expertise in the steel
industry and the construction business is unparalleled, but
it’s our customer focus that drives our vision.

At Wheeling Corrugating we are proud to be doing our part,

as hope is again built into the New York City skyline. One
World Trade Center (Freedom Tower) will include steel
decking, accessories, drafting, and project management
support provided by Wheeling Corrugating.

A FOCUS ON
One World Trade Center - New York, NY
• Tallest building in the United States
• 1,776 feet tall
• Over 2,600,000 square feet of office space
• Topping out planned for end of 2011
• Expected to acheive LEED Gold Certification

OUR PART
• Steel Decking
• Related Project Management
• Accessories
• Drafting

OVER 120 YEARS EXPERIENCE

1134 Market Street | Wheeling WV, 26003
Phone: 304/234-2332 | Fax: 304/234-2210 www.wheelingcorrugating.com
Tall Building guide
Top Firms
DBM Contractors, Inc.
Phone: 800-562-8460
Email: rcarnevale@dbmcm.com
Web: www.dbmcontractors.com
Product: Excavation Support and Deep Foundations
Description: Design-build specialty geotechnical
contractor providing drilled foundation support, earth
retention, slope stabilization and ground improvement
for structural support and seismic hazard mitigation.
Hayward Baker Inc.
Phone: 800-456-6548
Email: info@HaywardBaker.com
Web: www.HaywardBaker.com
Product: Liquefaction and Seismic Mitigation
Description: Hayward Baker has experience with the
full range of geotechnical construction techniques
for seismic/liquefaction mitigation for existing and
planned structures. Vibro replacement stone columns,
vibro compaction, Vibro Piers, jet, chemical, and
compaction grouting, dynamic compaction, and
soil mixing treat liquefiable soils insitu. Anchors,
micropiles, and jet grouting provide seismic retrofit.
Leslie E. Robertson Associates RLLP
Phone: 212-750-9000
Email: karimah.hourmanesh@lera.com
Web: www.lera.com
Product: Structural Engineering
Description: Leslie E. Robertson Associates, is an
85-person MBE/WBE consulting engineering firm
providing structural engineering design services
for architects, developers, contractors and owners.
Since1923, we have designed numerous landmark
projects, nationally and internationally. Our long
tradition of innovative design has brought us to the
forefront of the structural engineering profession.
Thornton Tomasetti
Phone: 917-661-7800
Email: RDescenza@ThorntonTomasetti.com
Web: www.ThorntonTomasetti.com
Product: Structural and skin design, construction
support, sustainability
Description: Thornton Tomasetti is a leader in
engineering design, investigation and analysis serving
clients worldwide on projects of all sizes and complexity.
With practices in building structure, building skin,
building performance, construction support services
and property loss consulting, Thornton Tomasetti
addresses the full life cycle of a structure.
Walter P Moore and Associates, Inc.
Phone: 404-898-9620
Email: tsanti@walterpmoore.com
Web: www.walterpmoore.com
Product: Structural Consulting Firm
Description: We provide structural engineering
consulting services for large scale buildings worldwide.
Specialties include Tall Buildings, Sports, Healthcare,
Aviation, Parking, Federal, and Higher Education.
STRUCTURE magazine
expertise in tall building design and construction
Software drawings and 3D foundation modeling in popular
CAD/modeling engines for industrial, commercial,
ADAPT Corporation petrochemical foundation design projects.
Phone: 650-306-2400
Product: DSAnchor
Email: info@adaptsoft.com
Description: DSAnchor makes it easy to complete
Web: www.adaptsoft.com
computationally-intensive anchor design using
Product: ADAPT-Builder: Floor Pro and MAT
Appendix D, ACI 318. With symmetrical and
Description: ADAPT-Builder software (Floor Pro
unsymmetrical anchor layouts on various concrete
& MAT) is for the design of reinforced concrete or
member layouts, DSAnchor computes individual and
post-tensioned floor and foundation systems. Use it
group anchor tension and shear capacities for cast-in
to generate detailed reinforcement requirements and
and post-installed anchors in seconds. Download a
drawings, investigate strength capacity of existing
free trial at our website.
slabs, or carry out vibration analysis for special use
structures. Seamless Revit Structure integration.
GT STRUDL
Computers & Structures, Inc. Phone: 404-894-2260
Email: casec@ce.gatech.edu
Phone: 510-649-2200
Web: www.gtstrudl.gatech.edu
Email: info@csiberkeley.com
Product: GT STRUDL
Web: www.csiberkeley.com
Description: GT STRUDL Structural Design &
Product: ETABS
Analysis software from the Georgia Tech-CASE Center
Description: For more than thirty years, ETABS has
offers linear and nonlinear static and dynamic analysis
been recognized as the industry standard for building
features including response spectrum, transient and
analysis and design software. Whether the project is
pushover analyses, plastic hinges, discrete dampers,
a one-story shopping center or the tallest building
base isolation, and nonlinear connections. New solvers
in the world, ETABS offers the comprehensive tools
enable the solution of static/dynamic models with over
needed to produce timely, efficient and elegant
300,000 DOF.
engineering solutions.
Devco Software, Inc. IES, Inc.
Phone: 800-707-0816
Phone: 541-426-5713
Email: sales@iesweb.com
Email: rob@devcosoftware.com
Web: www.iesweb.com
Web: www.devcosoftware.com
Product: VisualAnalysis
Product: LGBEAMER v8
Description: IES VisualAnalysis automates the design
Description: Analyze and design cold-formed cee,
of steel, wood, concrete, aluminum, and cold-formed
zee and channel shapes. 2007 NASPEC (2009 IBC)
beams, columns, and framing for anything from
compatible, including distortional buckling and
simple members to complete, complex structures.
torsion. Uniform, concentrated, sloped and axial
A modern and intuitive user interface simplifies
loads. Framed opening, shearwall, X-Brace, floor joist
modeling, analysis, design, and reporting.
and rafter design tools.
Digital Canal King & Associates LLC
Phone: 866-739-5464
Phone: 800-449-5033
Email: usa@spacegass.com
Email: clint@digitalcanal.com
Web: www.spacegass.com
Web: www.digitalcanal.com
Product: SPACE GASS
Product: Structural Expert Series
Description: SPACE GASS is a general purpose 3D
Description: Time tested 3D frame analysis and
analysis and design program. It is suitable for any job
design inside or outside of AutoCAD. Includes
from small beams to large high-rise buildings, towers,
integrated steel & concrete design, P-delta &
tanks, cable structures and bridges. Special features
frequency analysis, plate elements, tension struts,
include plate finite elements, cable elements, tension
cables, elastic-plastic bars, ultra-fast sparse solver,
and compression-only elements, moving loads and
fluid loads, moving loads, area loads and more!
links to CAD programs.
Try it free at our website.
Dimensional Solutions, Inc. LUSAS
Phone: 281-497-5991
Phone: 646-837-8756
Email: info@lusas.com
Email: Info@DimSoln.com
Web: www.lusas.com
Web: www.DimSoln.com
Product: LUSAS Civil and Structural
Product: Mat3D
Description: LUSAS Civil & Structural – as used on
Description: Mat3D completes soil and pile
the Intesa San Paolo Tower in Turin. Finite element
supported mat/pile cap designs supporting multiple
analysis software all types of structures from simple
load points, in an integrated environment that
slabs, building frames, masts, towers and tanks
takes you from concept to construction in minutes.
through to heavy civil engineering structures such as
Enhance your productivity from input to construction
cooling towers, dams, docks and tunnels.
48 June 2011
MIDASoft
Phone: 212-835-1666
Email: midasoft@midasuser.com
Web: www.midasuser.com
Product: midas Gen
Description: Structural analysis includes column
shortening, which reflects creep, shrinkage and
modulus of elasticity varying with time. Construction
stage analysis covers the sequence of erection, which
can incorporate addition and removal of members,
loadings and boundary conditions in conjunction with
time dependent material properties. midasGen also
handles nonlinear seismic analysis.
Powers Fasteners
Phone: 985-807-6666
Email: jzenor@powers.com
Web: www.powers.com
Product: Concrete Anchoring Systems
Description: FREE – Anchor Design Software –
POWERS DESIGN ASSIST. Helps Tall Building
designers deal with the complexity of ACI 318
Appendix D. Powers Fasteners now has 9 Product
Code Compliance ICC ES Reports! Visit our website
to download the software.
RISA Technologies
Phone: 949-951-5815
Email: info@risatech.com
Web: www.risa.com
Product: RISAFloor
Description: RISAFloor and RISA-3D form an
unrivaled building analysis and design package.
Modeling has never been easier whether you’re doing
a graphical layout, importing a BIM model (from
Autodesk Revit Structure), or prefer spreadsheets. Full
code checks and optimization for six different material
types makes RISA your first choice in buildings.
Strand7 Pty Ltd
Phone: 252-504-2282
Email: anne@beaufort-analysis.com
Web: www.strand7.com
Product: Strand7
Description: Strand7 is an advanced, general purpose,
FEA system used worldwide by engineers, designers,
and analysts for a wide range of structural analysis
applications. It comprises preprocessing, solvers
(linear and nonlinear static and dynamic capabilities)
and postprocessing. New features include staged
construction, new solvers including quasi-static for
shrinkage and creep/relaxation problems.
STRUCTUREPOINT
Phone: 847-966-4357
Email: info@structurepoint.org
Web: www.StructurePoint.org
Product: spSlab, spColumn, spMats, spWall, spBeam,
spFrame
Description: Reinforced concrete design software.
All Resource Guides and Updates for the 2011
Editorial Calendar are now available on the website,
www.STRUCTUREmag.org. Listings are provided
as a courtesy. STRUCTURE® magazine is not
responsible for errors.
STRUCTURE magazine
Suppliers
ASC Steel Deck
Phone: 800-726-2727
Email: info@ascsd.com
Web: www.ascsd.com
Product: 36/7/4 Roof Deck Attachment Pattern
Description: 36/7/4 is a revolutionary roof deck
attachment pattern that eliminates the overwhelming
number of attachment options with a single pattern
optimized for all span conditions.
Cortec Corporation
Phone: 651-429-1100
Email: jessij@cortecvci.com
Web: www.cortecvci.com
Product: MCI-2005
Description: MCI-2500 is a migrating corrosion
inhibitor admixture for protection of metallic
reinforcement. MCI-2005 has over 15 years of field
experience, including use on the world’s tallest building,
Burj Khalifa. MCI-2005 is proven to reduce corrosion
due to carbonation, chlorides and other aggressive
elements, extending the useful service life of structures.
CTS Cement Manufacturing Corporation
Phone: 800-929-3030
Email: jong@ctscement.com
Web: www.ctscement.com
Product: KSC™ Type-K Shrinkage-Compensating
Cement
Description: KSC Type-K shrinkage-compensating
cement products allow for installation of concrete
structures and industrial-size floors with no curling, no
drying shrinkage cracking, and without the need for
intermediate saw cut joints. KSC Type-K is designed
to keep the concrete in compression through the life
of the concrete.
Product: Rapid Set®
Description: Rapid Set is a brand of fast-setting
cement products used in concrete applications
requiring the highest durability and fastest strength
gain, achieving structural or drive-on strength in one
hour. Use for concrete repairs and restoration, and
new construction projects.
Decon USA Inc.
Phone: 866-332-6687
Email: frank@decon.ca
Web: www.deconusa.com
Product: Jordahl
Description: Decon® USA is the exclusive
representative of Jordahl in North American. Hot
rolled Anchor Channels are imbedded in concrete
and used to securely transfer high loads. Their main
application is for flexible connections of glazing panels
to high-rise buildings. Anchor Channels with welded
on rebar or corner pieces are available.
Product: Studrails®
Description: Decon® Studrails have become the
North American standard for punching shear
enhancement at slab-column connections. Studrails
are produced to the specifications of ASTM A1044,
ACI 318-08, and ICC ES 2494. Decon Studrails
are also being increasingly used to reinforce against
bursting stresses in banded post-tension anchor zones.
49 June 2011
The Dyson Corporation
Phone: 440-946-3500
Email: mhiggins@dysoncorp.com
Web: www.dysoncorp.com
Product: Structural Fasteners and Accessories
Description: Large structural fasteners and
construction accessories including foundation and
anchor rods, upset forgings, turnbuckles and clevises,
pins, heavy hex nuts, free spinning lock nuts and other
custom machined components.
Hardy Frames, Inc.
Phone: 805-477-0793
Email: dlopp@mii.com
Web: www.hardyframe.com
Product: Hardy Frames, Inc.
Description: Hardy Frames, Inc. manufactures
and markets the revolutionary Hardy Frame shear
wall system which includes pre-fabricated shear wall
panels and moment frames. The Hardy Frame system
allows Building Designers to economically and safely
minimize wall space and maximize wall openings
while resisting high wind and earthquake loads.
SAS Stressteel, Inc.
Phone: 973-244-5995
Email: info@stressteel.com
Web: www.stressteel.com
Product: Hot-rolled Fully Threaded Steel Bars
Description: Innovative products + solutions. SAS
hot-rolled steel thread bar sizes from #6 to #24 in
grades 80, 97, 150 and select 160ksi are used in a
wide range of applications from rock + soil anchors to
multi-bar caissons to high strength reinforcing steel
systems for high-rise concrete structures.
Simpson Strong-Tie
Phone: 925-560-9000
Email: web@strongtie.com
Web: www.strongtie.com
Product: Simpson Strong-Tie® Anchor Tiedown
System (ATS)
Description: The ATS is an innovative solution for
wood-frame multi-story construction. As a continuous
rod system, the ATS anchors stacked shearwalls at each
level while compensating for construction shrinkage and
settling within the structure. It’s now available in five and
six-story runs and with an expanded line of shrinkage
compensating devices.
SYNTHEON Inc.
Phone: 888-992-2353
Email: elemix@syntheoninc.com
Web: www.elemix.com
Product: Elemix® Concrete Additive
Description: Elemix concrete additive, a newly
engineered lightweight synthetic particle that is code-
compliant as validated by ICC-ES, has been specially
formulated for use in concrete. Because the particles
disperse evenly in the mix, reliable consistency and
improved performance are achieved in lightweight
structural concrete.
 Work quickly.
Work simply.
Work accurately.

StructurePoint’s Productivity Suite of powerful software tools

for reinforced concrete analysis & design

Finite element analysis & de- Analysis, design

sign of reinforced, precast & investigation of
ICF & tilt-up concrete walls reinforced concrete
beams & one-way
slab systems

Design & investigation Analysis, design

of rectangular, round & investigation of
& irregularly shaped reinforced concrete
concrete column sections beams & slab systems

Finite element analysis & design of reinforced concrete

foundations, combined footings or slabs on grade

StructurePoint’s suite of productivity tools are so easy
to learn and simple to use that you’ll be able to start saving
time and money almost immediately. And when you use
StructurePoint software, you’re also taking advantage
of the Portland Cement Association’s more than 90 years
of experience, expertise, and technical support in concrete
design and construction.
Visit StructurePoint.org to download your trial
copy of our software products.
For more information on licensing and pricing
options please call 847.966.4357 or e-mail
info@StructurePoint.org.

STR 6-09

The World’s Tallest Building
The Burj Khalifa
By William F. Baker, P.E., S.E., FIStructE and James J. Pawlikowski, S.E., LEED AP
Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP received an Outstanding Project Award for the Burj Khalifa project in the 2010
NCSEA Annual Excellence in Structural Engineering awards program (Category – International Structures).
T
he goal of the Burj Khalifa Tower is not
simply to be the world’s highest build-
ing; it’s to embody the world’s highest
aspirations. Such a project goal by neces-
sity requires pushing current analysis, material, and
construction technologies to literally new heights.
However, as such a building height has never before
been attempted, it is also necessary to ensure all
technologies and methods utilized are of sound devel-
opment and practice. As such, the designers sought
to be able to use conventional systems, materials, and
construction methods, modified and utilized in new
capacities, to achieve such a lofty goal.
The Tower is 828 meters (2717 feet) in height, and
is the world’s tallest building in all three categories
defined by the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban
Habitat. In fact, Burj Khalifa is approximately 319
meters (1047 feet) taller than the previous record
holder, Taipei 101 in Taiwan. The construction of
the Tower began in January 2004, with its offi-
cial opening occurring January 4, 2010. The Burj
Khalifa Tower is the centerpiece of a $20 billion
development located just outside of downtown
Dubai, UAE. The project consists of the Tower
itself, as well as an adjacent Podium structure, and
separate 12-story Office Annex and 2-story Pool
Annex. The 280,000 square-meter (3,000,000
square-foot ) reinforced concrete multi-use Tower
is predominantly residential and office, and also
contains retail and a Giorgio Armani Hotel.
The architects and engineers worked closely
together from the beginning of the project to deter-
mine the shape of the Tower, in order to provide an
efficient building in terms of its structural system
and in its response to wind, while still maintain-
ing the integrity of the initial design concept. The
floor plan of the tower consists of a tri-axial, “Y”
shaped plan, formed by having three separate wings
connected to a central core. As the Tower rises, one
wing at each tier sets back in a spiraling pattern,
further emphasizing its height. In addition to its
aesthetic and functional advantages, the spiraling
“Y” shaped plan was also utilized to shape the Burj
Khalifa to reduce the wind forces on the Tower. The
setbacks provide many different floor plates, result-
ing in many different widths to the Tower over its
height. This stepping and shaping of the Tower has
the effect of “confusing the wind” – wind vortices
never get organized over the height of the building
STRUCTURE magazine
award winners and outstanding projects Spotlight
because at each new tier the wind encounters a dif-
ferent building shape.
The structural system can be described as a “but-
tressed” core, and consists of high performance
reinforced concrete wall construction. Each of the
wings buttress the others via a six-sided central core,
or hexagonal hub. Corridor walls extend from the
central core to near the end of each wing, termi-
nating in thickened hammer head walls. Perimeter
columns and flat plate floor construction complete
the system. At mechanical floors, outrigger walls
are provided to link the perimeter columns to the
interior wall system, allowing the perimeter columns
to participate in the lateral load resistance of the
structure; hence, all of the vertical concrete is uti-
lized to support both gravity and lateral loads. The
result is a tower that is extremely stiff laterally and
torsionally. It is also a very efficient structure, in that
the gravity load resisting system has been utilized
so as to maximize its use in resisting lateral loads.
The top of the Tower consists of an approximately
230-meter (750-foot) tall structural steel spire, and
the entire Tower is founded on a 3.7-meter (12-foot)
thick reinforced concrete raft foundation, supported
by reinforced concrete bored piles which are 1.5
meters (5 feet) in diameter and 43 meters (141 feet)
in length (194 piles total).
The Burj Khalifa Tower utilized the latest advance-
ments in construction techniques and material
technology. The walls and perimeter wing columns
were formed using Doka’s SKE 100 automatic self-
climbing formwork system, and consist of concrete
ranging from C60 (8700psi) to C80 (11600psi)
cube strength. Floor slabs were poured on MevaDec
panel formwork. Construction sequence had the
central core walls and slabs placed first, with the
wing walls and slabs next, and the wing nose col-
umns and slabs following. Three primary tower William F. Baker, S.E., P.E.,
cranes were located adjacent to the central core, FASCE, FIStructE is a Partner
with each continuing to various heights as required. with Skidmore, Owings &
High-speed, high-capacity construction hoists were Merrill, LLP and can be reached
utilized to transport workers and materials to the at william.baker@som.com
required heights. A specialized GPS monitoring
James J. Pawlikowski, S.E.,
system was developed to monitor the verticality of
LEED AP is an Associate
the structure, due to the limitations of conventional
Director with Skidmore,
surveying techniques. Structural steel for the spire
Owings & Merrill, LLP
was erected as much as practical on the ground and
and can be reached at
lifted into place, both to minimize crane time and
james.pawlikowski@som.com
to simplify connections.▪
51 June 2011
 Separate SE Licensure: Parallel to or in Series with PE Licensure?
By Susan A. Jorgensen, P.E.
Chair, NCSEA Licensing Committee
T
he licensing of structural engineers (SE) has taken vari-
ous forms over the years, from being engulfed in the
News form the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
same category as civil and other professional engineers
(PE) to being a completely separate license governed
by a board that is not involved in regulating other disciplines.
Recent efforts to implement a structural license in each jurisdic-
tion have raised the question of whether it should be distinct, as
in Illinois and Hawaii, or obtained after initial licensure as a PE,
as in several West Coast states. The NCSEA Licensing Committee
has been asked to render an opinion on this issue.
SE licensing in Illinois is completely separate from other dis-
ciplines to the point of having a distinct licensing board for the
profession. The primary reason was that the SE licensing board
in Illinois was created long before other engineering disciplines
were required to be licensed. Hawaii also requires the SE license
for the design of all structures, but does not have a separate
licensing board. This type of SElicensing could be viewed as a
parallel track to licensure as a PE. In both states, 16 hours of
examination are required to obtain the SE license. A few other
states restrict the use of the SE title by requiring passage of 16
hours of structural examination, but do not restrict the practice
of structural engineering.
A number of western states require a PE, typically obtained by
means of the 8-hour civil examination, prior to being eligible to
sit for 16 hours of structural examination in order to receive the
SE license, as well. Although these states have had a variety of
structural examination requirements over the years, all are now
accepting the new NCEES 16-hour Structural exam to meet the
additional SE requirements, although California requires one
additional state-specific examination. In these jurisdictions, the
SE license is considered a post-PE credential that expands the
scope of the original PE license; in other words, SE licensure
occurs in series with the PE.
There are pros and cons to both methods of licensing, so the
question is not as simple as it might first appear. Because states
have headed down different paths with respect to SE licensure,
it may be many years before there is widespread agreement
among jurisdictions.
Separate licensing in parallel with the PE allows for recognition
of structural engineering as a distinct discipline. Considering
NCSEA News
NCSEA Webinar
June It Just Ain’t So: Welding Myths that
21
Structural Engineers Need to Know About
In this presentation, welding-related myths will be presented and
challenged. Topics to be discussed include selection of weld types,
weld orientation, weld backing, shop versus field welding, overhead
welding, prequalified WPSs, weld quality and welding costs.
Duane K. Miller, Sc.D., P.E., is a recognized authority on
the design and performance of welded connections. He has
authored and co-authored chapters of many texts, including the
AISC Design Guide 21 on Welding and the Mark’s Handbook
of Engineering, 11th Edition. Dr. Miller currently serves as
Chair of the AWS D1 Structural Welding Code Committee.
STRUCTURE magazine 52
that the education requirements for the profession can cur-
rently be obtained through several different programs – civil
engineering, architectural engineering, structural engineering
– identifying it as a stand-alone specialty may better clarify
its boundaries. This method of licensing structural engineers
typically requires passing the structural examination (now the
NCEES 16-hour exam) without necessarily having extensive
knowledge or experience in any other discipline, which is espe-
cially important to those who received their education through
a program other than civil engineering.
Separate licensing in series with a PE truly raises the bar for
SEs, because 16 hours of examination are typically required
beyond the standard 8 hours for other engineering disciplines.
Candidates must have experience and knowledge of another
discipline – again, in most cases civil engineering – to be able
to obtain the PE before then taking and passing the struc-
tural exam. In states where the civil engineering community
is actively working with the licensing board and legislature,
this approach may be the most viable politically, since it has
been explicitly endorsed by ASCE in Policy Statement 524
and by SEI in Policy Statement 101. Making the SE license
something above and beyond the PE recognizes the effort that
it takes to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public
from structural failures.
In fact, this is the primary purpose of NCSEA and its Licensing
Committee–to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the
public. Separate licensure of structural engineers, either parallel
to or in series with the PE license, is a means to accomplish this
overriding objective. Furthermore, the development of licens-
ing laws and rules that are similar across all jurisdictions allows
for simple comity between them, thus reducing confusion of
the general public and helping serve the same ultimate goal.
Although development of uniform licensing laws and rules
may not be possible in the short term, the NCSEA Licensing
Committee recognizes that each individual state is different
and will support the efforts determined to be the most likely
to succeed in each individual state. Once SE licensure is imple-
mented across the country in some form, the next step will be
to develop strategies for making the process and requirements
more uniform.
AL
EN
R
GI
TU
NE
C
RU
ER
ST
NCSEA
NG
IO
UI
AT
IN
NT
UC
CO
ED
Diamond
Reviewed
He formerly chaired the Seismic Welding subcommittee and
the AASHTO-AWS Bridge Welding subcommittee. He is a
member of the AISC Specification Committee, a Professional
Engineer, Certified Welding Inspector and Qualified Welder.
The cost is $250 per internet connection. Several people may
attend for one connection fee. Register at www.ncsea.com.
Approved in all 50 states. This course will award 1.5 hours of
continuing education. The times will be 10:00 am Pacific, 11:00
am Mountain, 12:00 pm Central, and 1:00 pm Eastern.
June 2011
 NCSEA News
NCSEA Nineteenth Annual Conference
October 20 -22, 2011 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Courtesy of Joseph Mills Photography.
As an SEA member, you can take advantage of NCSEA’s
member discount by registering before September 1st.

Conference registration fees

SEA Members before/after September 1: $675/$750
Nonmembers: $750
Can’t attend the whole weekend?
Individual event costs are as follows:
Thursday night Reception: $75
Friday Program: $295/$345
Friday night Dinner at the Oklahoma City Museum
of Art: $150
Saturday Program: $245/$295
Saturday night Reception and Awards Banquet: $150
Spouses are welcome at breakfast and evening events

News from the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations

for an additional fee of $275.

Exhibitors
With many events and opportunities being offered, Oklahoma City
• American Institute of Steel Construction
is proud to host this year’s NCSEA Annual Conference. Held at the
• AZZ Galvanizing Services
Renaissance Convention Center, the program will include:
• CMC Steel Products
• Committee meetings, trade show, and reception on Thursday.
• CSC Inc.
• Presentations by speakers from across the country on Friday:
• Design Data
Experience national “Leadership in Structural Engineering”
• Fabreeka International, Inc.
and learn how to step up your practice while earning hours of
• Hardy Frames, Inc.
Diamond Reviewed continuing education.
• LNA Solutions
• Dinner at the Oklahoma City Museum of Art, including abun-
• Powers Fasteners
dant opportunities for networking and sharing ideas with your
• RISA Technologies
peers on Friday evening.
• SidePlate Systems, Inc.
• Committee and business reports, followed by lunch, panel, and
• Simpson Strong-Tie
workshops on separate licensing on Saturday.
• Steel Cast Connections
• Reception and Awards Banquet on Saturday night, honor-
• Valmont Industries
ing finalists of the 2011 NCSEA Excellence in Structural
• Vector Corrosion Technologies
Engineering Awards Program, as well as the Cornforth,
• W. R. Grace & Co.
Delahay, and Service Award Recipients. Entries for the
project awards are due July 22. www.ncsea.com.

Make your reservation online:

http://tinyurl.com/3gu7no3
or call toll free 800-468-3571.

Courtesy of OKC CVB.

STRUCTURE magazine 53 June 2011

 SEl Teams in New Zealand and Japan
Members of SEI are participating in investigatory
teams to examining damage inflicted by the recent
earthquakes and tsunami.
The first of as many as seven ASCE reconnaissance
The Newsletter of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE

teams to investigate the damage caused by the March

11 earthquake and tsunami arrived in Japan on
April 15. Led by structural engineer Gary Chock,
P.E., S.E., M. ASCE, president of the Honolulu-
based practice Martin & Chock, the first team is
documenting the performance of buildings and
other structures not addressed by other teams. The
team is concentrating on Miyagi and Iwate prefec-
tures, with a focus on how what they learn can be
incorporated into the tsunami structural design
provisions under development for the next revision
of the ASCE 7 standard, Minimum Design Standards
for Buildings and Other Structures. Visit the ASCE
website (www.asce.org) to read Gary Chock’s Blog.
An ASCE-authorized Structural Engineering Institute
reconnaissance team of five engineers traveled Monday,
April 4, to Christchurch, New Zealand, to explore the causes
of damage to infrastructure as a result of the magnitude 6.3 Have you been missing
earthquake on February 22. The team is being led by Robert
Pekelnicky, P.E., S.E., LEED AP, M. ASCE. Visit the ASCE important SEI news and
website (www.asce.org) to read Robert Pekelnicky’s blog.
information?
SEI uses email as the primary method of communicating
with members. Since a number of our members don’t have a
current email address on file, they are not receiving the SEI
Update, calls for papers, announcements about conferences,
programs, etc. Please take a few minutes to update your email
at www.asce.org/myprofile or call 800-548-ASCE (2723) or
703-295-6300, or email member@asce.org.
Structural Columns

Committee News
Structural Design For Fire
Conditions Committee
The committee on Structural Design for Fire Condition
Standards is beginning an update to the ASCE/SEI/SFPE 29-06,
Standard Calculation Methods for Structural Fire Protection. The
committee is in need of members from the regulatory industry.
Building or fire code officials who are interested can contact
Paul Sgambati at psgambati@asce.org or can go directly to the
online application for committee membership at the Structural
Engineering Institute website.
Errata
SEI posts up-to-date errata information for our
publications at www.SEInstitute.org. Click on
“Publications” on our menu, and select “Errata.” If you
have any errata that you would like to submit, please
email it to Paul Sgambati at psgambati@asce.org.
SEI Young Professionals
Committee
The 2011 Structures Congress hosted the first meeting of
the newly formed SEI Young Professionals Committee. The
committee was created to promote involvement of Young
Professionals, both practitioners and academics, within SEI
to foster collaboration and mentorship opportunities. The
committee will facilitate young member participation in all
divisions of SEI. The committee will especially be highlighting
the concerns and challenges facing young professionals in the
industry through articles, papers and presentations. A steering
committee of officers is composed of Bob Pekelnicky, Chair, Dr.
Jennifer Rice, Vice-Chair, and Cherylyn Henry, Secretary. The
committee will strive to maintain a balance of academic and
practitioner members. A position is currently open for an addi-
tional academic member. The committee defines an academic
member as a professor. Please contact Bob at RPekelnicky@
degenkolb.com or Cherylyn at chenry@structuralgrace.com
for further information.

STRUCTURE magazine 54 June 2011


2011 SEI and ASCE Structural Awards
The Structural Engineering Institute (SEI) proudly recognized
the following recipients at the 2011 Structures Congress in Las
Vegas, Nevada on April 14, 2011:
Structural Engineering Institute Awards
Dennis L. Tewksbury Award
The Tewksbury award recognizes distinguished service to SEI.
The 2011 Award is presented to James R. Harris, Ph.D., P.E.,
M. ASCE. Dr. Harris has a long and distinguished history of
service to SEI, ASCE, and the structural engineering profes-
sion. He chaired the committee for ASCE 7 for 7-98, 7-02, and
7-05. He served as a member and then Chair of the Codes and
Standards Activity Division Executive Committee 1995-2005,
and led as President of SEI 2008-2009. He also served as a
member of the ASCE/SEI Pentagon Team, and the SEI Chile
Earthquake Assessment Team in 2010. Dr. Harris is Owner
and Principal of J.R. Harris & Company in Denver, Colorado.
Walter P Moore, Jr. Award
This award is presented for significant contributions to the
development of codes and standards. The 2011 recipient is
Michael O’Rourke Ph.D., P.E., M. ASCE. Dr. O’Rourke is
commended for his significant and career long contributions to
Structural Columns
Award is Donna Friis, P.E., M. ASCE for her outstanding
efforts on behalf of the Local Activities Division, both for her
enthusiasm and dedication to the development of local SEI
Chapters and for her long-term commitment to serving the
Institute through technical, administrative, and conference
committees. Ms. Friis has served on the ASCE 7 Wind Loads
Subcommittee, the 2010 Structures Congress Local Committee,
the Local Activities Division Executive Committee, and the
SEI Membership Committee. Ms. Friis is a senior structural
engineer with CDM in Maitland, Florida.
American Society of
Civil Engineering Structural Awards
Shortridge Hardesty Award
The 2011 award goes to Mark A. Bradford, Ph.D., D.Sc., P.E.,
M. ASCE, in recognition of his significant and influential contri-
butions to the art and science of stability of metal structures. His
research has been praised for its diversity and uniformly superior
quality. Prof. Bradford is currently an Australian Laureate Fellow
and Scientia Professor in the Department of Engineering the
University of South Wales, Sydney Australia.

The Newsletter of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE

Nathan M. Newmark Medal
the development of structural codes and standards which have
The 2011 medal is awarded to Andrei M. Reinhorn, Ph.D.,
advanced the science of snow load engineering both nationally
P.E., F. ASCE, for his contributions to the development of
and internationally. For more than 30 years, Dr. O’Rourke has
experimental and analytical methods in structural dynamics and
been actively involved in developing provisions for defining
in design of response-control systems for earthquake resistant
snow loading on structures and is the clear leader of the snow
buildings, as well as contributions to quantify earthquake resil-
load community for the past few decades. His extensive research
ient communities. He is also recognized for his contributions
has resulted in changes to building codes and contributions to
in the development of new modeling techniques for nonlinear
technical literature. He has organized sessions on the topic at
structural analysis, and structural control of inelastic struc-
technical meetings and conferences, and served in leadership
tures. Dr. Reinhorn is the Clifford Furnas Eminent Professor
positions on national and international professional commit-
in the Department of Civil, Structural, and Environmental
tees that focus on snow load provisions and snow load hazards.
Engineering at University at Buffalo (SUNY).
Dr. O’Rourke is a professor in the Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Raymond C. Reese Research Prize
The 2011 prize is presented to Jonah J. Shishkin, P.Eng.,
Gene Wilhoite Award
M. ASCE; Robert G. Driver, Ph.D., P.Eng.; and Gilbert Y.
The 2011 Award recipient is Gary E. Bowles, P.E., F. ASCE
Grondin, Ph.D., P.Eng. They are receiving the prize for the
for his significant contributions to the advancement of the Art
paper Analysis of Steel Plate Sheer Walls Using Modified Strip
and Science of transmission line engineering. Mr. Bowles has
Model, published in the November 2009 issue of the Journal
served as a member of several ASCE committees, many of which
of Structural Engineering. Mr. Shishkin is from Worley Parsons
produced manuals of practice or standards in the field of elec-
Canada; Prof. Driver is a professor of Structural Engineering in
trical transmission structures, including Electrical Transmission
the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the
Structures, Design of Steel Transmission Poles Structures Standards
University of Alberta; Prof. Grondin is a professor of Structural
(ASCE/SEI 48 Standard), Design of Steel Transmission Poles
Engineering in the Department of Civil and Environmental
Structures (MOP 72), Reliability Based Design of Utility Pole
Engineering at the University of Alberta.
Structures (MOP 113), and the Loading Committee (MOP 74).
In addition, he has been a member of the Steering Committees George Winter Award
for the Electrical Transmission and Substation Conferences held Michel Bruneau, Ph.D., P.Eng., F. ASCE, is presented with
in 2002, 2006, 2009, and 2012. He has authored/co-authored the 2011 award in recognition of his contributions to structural
numerous technical papers, guides, and standards. Mr. Bowles engineering and seismic hazard mitigation, and his contributions
is Vice President, Transmission, for Electrical Consultants Inc. to creative fictional literature which succeed in telling the hazard
mitigation story to a broader audience and uniquely qualify him
SEI President’s Award
for this award. Prof. Bruneau is a professor in the Department of
The SEI President’s Award recognizes exemplary contributions
Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering at University
to the success of SEI. The recipient of the 2011 SEI President’s
at Buffalo (SUNY).

STRUCTURE magazine 55 June 2011

 CASE Highlights
The Newsletter of the Council of American Structural Engineers

CASE Strategic Planning Effort Begins

The Council of American Structural Engineers (CASE) conducted a Strategic Planning session in Las Vegas, April 13–14, to
develop a new set of guidelines to steer the coalition in for the next five years. Identifying methods for increasing membership
will be a critical area of focus for the participants, along with marketing existing and new CASE products. A recent survey of
CASE members served as the basis for the planning effort.

CASE Releases New Risk Management Tools

Firm and project planning is Computers and engineering
3 crucial to reducing your firm’s
risk and to avoiding claims. 5
software are used in every struc-
tural engineering office. It is
Planning: One major facet of firm plan-
Plan to Be Claims Free often a struggle to manage and
Tool No. 3-2 ning is predicting upcoming Education: supervise these tools. Software
Educate all of the Players in the Process

Staffing and Revenue

Projection
revenue and staffing demand Tool No. 5-3: Managing the use of availability is in constant flux,
Computers and Software in the Structural
to make sure that your firm
Firm and project planning is crucial to reducing your firm's risk and to avoiding claims. One major facet
of firm planning is predicting upcoming revenue and staffing demand to make sure that your firm has the
resources to adequately service upcoming booked and potential projects. The CASE Tool 3-2: Staffing
Engineering Office software packages are continu-
has the resources to adequately ally updated and revised, and
and Revenue Projection provides a simple to use and easy to manipulate spreadsheet-based tool for
predicting the staff that will be necessary to complete both "booked" and "potential" projects. The Computers and engineering software are used in every structural engineering office. It is often a
spreadsheet can be further utilized to track historical staffing demand to assist with future staffing and struggle to manage and supervise these tools. Software availability is in constant flux, software
revenue projections. It is recommended that a firm create a database of actual revenue achieved to packages are continually updated and revised, and few software packages fully meet the needs of

service upcoming booked and few software packages fully

revenue projected for a defined period of time. Knowing your firm's own patterns of revenue and staffing any office.
projections can offer a forward looking key indicator for making business decisions.
Tool 3-2 includes the following key features: CASE Tool 5-3 is intended to assist the structural engineering office in the task of managing
computers and software. This tool is a two level approach. The first portion of the tool is a

potential projects. CASE Tool meet the needs of any office.

• The tool is developed in Microsoft Excel to allow individual firms to modify it as needed for their
own practice. It is not “locked”.
• There is an Instructions tab with special instructions on use and instructions on how to modify the
document for your own needs.
white paper outlining concern and issues related to the use of structural engineering software and
computers. This paper is directed at principals and managers in firms with the intent of
encouraging action within each firm to develop management procedures. The second portion of
the tool is a worksheet that will allow firms to thoughtfully address current computer/software

3-2: Staffing and Revenue CASE Tool 5-3: Managing

use as well as issues that should be addressed for effective management. This tool is not
• The spreadsheet is set up for 10 project managers, but can be easily modified to accommodate intended to provide answers to all of the various related concerns or to be a template for a
any number of PM's, studios, groups, regional offices, etc. management policy, but is intended to be a tool for each firm to assess and address its specific
needs.

Projection provides a simple

• The spreadsheet is set up for Quarterly projections, but can easily be modified to accommodate

•
monthly, yearly, or any other desired timeframe.

Data can easily be extracted from the spreadsheet to other spreadsheets to compare projected
staffing/billing with actual data when it becomes available.
the Use of Computers and
The tools are provided in MS Word format for easy editing to meet specific firm needs.

to use and easy to manipulate Software in the Structural

spreadsheet-based tool for Engineering Office is intended
predicting the staff that will be necessary to complete both to assist the structural engineering office in the task of managing
“booked” and “potential” projects. The spreadsheet can be computers and software. This tool is a two level approach. The
further utilized to track historical staffing demand to assist with first portion of the tool is a white paper outlining concerns and
future staffing and revenue projections. It is recommended that issues related to the use of structural engineering software and
a firm create a database of actual revenue achieved to revenue computers. This paper is directed at principals and managers in
projected for a defined period of time. Knowing your firm’s firms, with the intent of encouraging action within each firm
own patterns of revenue and staffing projections can offer a to develop management procedures. The second portion of the
forward looking key indicator for making business decisions. tool is a worksheet that will allow firms to thoughtfully address
CASE in Point

Preparing and maintaining a proper Project Work Plan is a current computer/software use as well as issues that should be
fundamental responsibility of a project manager. Work Plans addressed for effective management.
document project delivery strategies and communicate them It is the third tool related to the Fifth Foundation for Risk
to the team members. CASE Management, Education.

3 Tool 3-4: Project Work Plan

Template serves as a template
A summary for each tool can be found at
to guide the Project Manager
Education: www.acec.org/case/tools.cfm. To obtain these tools
and streamline the process.
Educate all of the Players in the Process

for free, your firm must be a member of CASE, or

Tool No. 3-4: Project Work Plan Template Project Manager will use this
you can purchase them from ACEC’s Bookstore at
template to create a project
Preparing and maintaining a proper Project Work Plan is a fundamental responsibility of a
project manager. Work Plans document project delivery strategies and communicate them to the

www.acec.org.
team members. This document serves as a template to guide the Project Manager and streamline
the process.

Work Plan that will be stored

Project Manager will use this template to create a project Work Plan that will be stored with the
project documents. This template is divided into the following major sections for ease of
organization:

1. Project Description
2. Financial Management Plan
3. Risk Management Plan
with the project documents.
4. Resource Management Plan
5. Design Management Plan
These are the second and
fourth tools related to the
6. Documentation Management Plan
7. Quality Management Plan
8. Construction Phase Management Plan

Third Foundation for Risk

Generally, it will not be feasible to complete the entire Work Plan at project initiation. Instead,
the Work Plan should be developed incrementally as the project progresses.

Management, Planning.
1

STRUCTURE magazine 56 June 2011


ACEC Education Information
Strategies to Address Fee
Reduction Demands Now
Available for Download
More than 160 ACEC members participated in the online
seminar, Responding to Requests for Discounts or Unilateral Fee
Reductions, to learn effective responses to many state DOTs’
demands for unilateral fee reductions for engineering services.
P. Douglas Folk of Folk & Associates outlined various
ways that firms can deal with these client requests, includ-
ing legal challenges and applications of Federal Acquisition
Regulations. The popular online seminar is now avail-
able on download. For complete details and to purchase:
http://tinyurl.com/3cayqoq
Register Now for Senior
Executives Institute Class 17
Space is Limited
Participants in ACEC’s Senior Executives Institute (SEI)
acquire new tools and insights to prosper in the increasingly chal-
lenging A/E business environment. Current and up-and-coming
executives with a minimum five years experience managing
professional design programs/businesses are invited to register
for this highly regarded leadership-building opportunity. Next
available is Class 17, which begins in September 2011. For
more information, contact Deirdre McKenna at 202-682-4328
or dmckenna@acec.org.
ACEC Government Affairs Information
DOD Previews New Design-Build ACEC Supports New Bill to
Selection Proposal for ACEC Increase Water Project Funding
The Department of Defense unveiled its proposed design-
build selection process to ACEC, prior to the plan’s release for
public comment. The new Design-Build Total Ownership Cost
(TOC) Template places greater emphasis on project life-cycle
costs in the design-build selection process. ACEC found that
the new approach could strengthen the role and importance
of engineers in the design-build process. At the same time, the
Council suggested that DOD weight the TOC more substan-
tially against other selection criteria, factor in design-impacted
manpower costs, and reconsider the aggressive rollout schedule
for the pilot program.
For additional information contact Mark Steiner at
msteiner@acec.org.
STRUCTURE magazine
CASE in Point
Expert Witness Training Can
CASE is a part of the American Council of Engineering Companies
Earn Big Returns for Clients, Firm
June 23-24, San Diego, CA
Have you been an expert witness? Is there a possibility you
might serve as an expert witness – for your own firm or a client?
Are people in your firm qualified as expert witnesses?
Applying Expertise as an Engineering Expert Witness, June 23-24,
San Diego, provides the inside knowledge and the courtroom
know-how you need to confidently serve in this unique and
demanding role. Gain recognition as an expert and take the first
step in earning the EXW (SM) designation offered by ACEC.
For complete details on course content and to register:
www.acec.org/education/eventdetails.cfm?eventid=1246
Representatives Geoff Davis (R-KY) and Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-NJ)
will introduce ACEC-supported legislation to boost funding
for water projects through private activity bonds.
The legislation would waive the state volume cap on private
activity bonds for water and wastewater projects, significantly
expanding the availability of low cost financing for local com-
munities. This reform is critical, as most states allocate only a
small fraction of their private activity bonding capacity to water
infrastructure projects.
Wall Street experts and the EPA have projected that the changes
could make available as much as $50 billion over ten years in
private capital for water infrastructure.
57 June 2011
Structural Forum
Grandfathering
Transitioning Toward a Structural Engineering License
By Barry Arnold, S.E., SECB
M
any states stand on the thresh-
old of two great opportunities.
First is the opportunity to
implement changes to their
current engineering licensure laws to include
the definition of a structural engineer and
define the credentials that someone must
have in order to use that title. Second is the
opportunity to transition currently licensed
professional engineers toward separate struc-
tural engineering licensure and minimize the
impact on any individual person or business.
Because much has already been written about
the former, this article will deal primarily with
the latter issue.
As states see the advantages of structural
licensing, many engineers are asking an
important question: “How is the change in
the licensure law going to affect me?” The
correct answer is: “Not at all.” To ensure that
this is the case, providing a transition (or
“grandfathering”) clause is an important part
of successfully implementing changes to a
state’s licensure laws.
The purpose of structural licensing is to raise
the bar by requiring structural engineers in
the future to pass the NCEES Structural
Engineering (SE) examination, in addition
to or in lieu of one of the other NCEES
Principles & Practice of Engineering exami-
nations. Each state has the right to decide
how to implement a structural engineering
license within the framework of its current
licensure laws. All states that adopt structural
licensing should consider having some form of
transition clause. The definition of a transition
clause is the ability of qualified professionals
to continue practicing without conforming
to the revised examinations, education, and/
or experience requirements. The transition
clause is the easiest way to give those who
believe that they are competent to practice
structural engineering, and who have been
practicing structural engineering in the past,
the opportunity to acquire the title of struc-
tural engineer.
Each state can determine what its transition
clause will say, and most states are opting for
something as simple as having the applicants
sign an affidavit. This is usually a legal declara-
tion by the applicants that they are competent
and capable to practice structural engineering.
STRUCTURE magazine
opinions on topics of current importance to structural engineers
It is important to understand that the engi-
neers in each state can and should have a
huge impact in deciding what the transition
clause will require. NCSEA has no specific
recommendations regarding the content of
the transition clause; however, it is imperative
that the process for developing it be fair, equi-
table and open. All interested parties must be
consulted and their input seriously considered.
The transition clause should not be used
as a means to weed out questionable engi-
neers, or otherwise restrict anyone from
acquiring the title of structural engineer or
restrict those currently practicing. Rather,
it should be viewed as a chance to recog-
nize the achievements of those currently
practicing by reaching out, embracing, and
helping those who want to acquire the title
structural engineer, and welcoming them to
the higher standard.
Two troubling issues arise as a result of
having a transition clause. First, some engi-
neers who are perhaps undeserving of the title
of structural engineer, through a lack of edu-
cation and/or experience, will be permitted
to use that title. Second, those engineers who
have already taken the NCEES SE examina-
tion or its past counterparts may object to the
fact that other engineers are being allowed to
transition in so “easily”.
Regarding the first issue – because the transi-
tion clause leaves the door wide open, so to
speak, it is likely that some engineers will make
use of the opportunity to acquire the title of
structural engineer even though they have not
legitimately earned it through education and/
or experience. This is an unfortunate loophole,
and there is no easy way to fix it. However, one
should recognize that even without a transition
clause, this individual would still be allowed
to practice structural engineering. Instead of
focusing on negative aspects of the issue, per-
haps it is best to acknowledge that there will
be numerous well-educated and highly experi-
enced engineers who will utilize the transition
clause, and the structural engineering profes-
sion will benefit greatly from their ongoing
presence and contributions. Additionally, time
and scrutiny have a way of determining who is
competent and capable to practice structural
engineering regardless of anyone’s self-assess-
ment of ability.
58 June 2011
Regarding the second issue – there are, in
reality, two types of structural engineering
examinations. Some have opted to study hard,
pay the testing fees, and take the NCEES SE
exam; its predecessors, the NCEES SE I and
SE II exams; the Western States SE exam;
and/or a state-specific SE exam. Those who
have gone this route are to be commended
and congratulated for their efforts. Those
individuals often benefit by other states recog-
nizing their achievements through reciprocity.
Others have also engaged in an enormous
amount of study and sacrifice – personal, as
well as financial – to pass a different kind of
examination. A lengthy career in the struc-
tural engineering profession is a challenge that
has no equal among the written engineering
tests available today. Both types of examina-
tions should be considered equivalent – not
identical, but certainly equivalent. In other
words, if you have passed the NCEES SE
examination or something like it, you should
embrace and welcome the transitioned engi-
neers as your equals.
One of the unfortunate consequences of
having a transition clause is that the full effect
of structural licensing will not be felt for some
years. That is a sacrifice what we should all be
willing to make to raise the bar for the struc-
tural engineering profession in the future.
We also should keep in mind that the pur-
pose of structural licensing is not to create a
group of elitist snobs. An open and fair transi-
tion clause will demonstrate our willingness
to work together and our desire to create a
better future for our profession. The push
toward structural licensing in all states should
be viewed for what it is: an expression of our
desire to serve our clients better, and fulfill
our ethical obligation to hold paramount
the safety, health, and welfare of the public.▪
Barry Arnold, S.E., SECB is a Vice
President at ARW Engineers in Ogden,
Utah (barrya@arwengineers.com). He is
a Past President of the Structural Engineers
Association of Utah (SEAU), serves as
the SEAU Delegate to NCSEA, and is a
member of the NCSEA Board of Directors
and the NCSEA Licensing Committee.
Seismic Design

For information on additional new features in RISA-3D 9.1

please visit www.risa.com/newfeatures

www.risa.com 800.332.RISA
© 2011 RISA Technologies, LLC